TAJING TAPOK,EAST SIANG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR
Facts
The assessee, Tajing Tapok, an individual engaged in various businesses, did not file his Return of Income for AY 2017-18, claiming exemption under Section 10(26) due to his Scheduled Tribe status in Arunachal Pradesh. Consequently, the Assessing Officer passed a best judgment assessment under Section 144, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's first appeal, acknowledging the exemption eligibility but denying relief due to non-filing of the return.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessment was made ex-parte under Section 144, and the assessee deserved another opportunity to present his claims. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, directing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether an assessee eligible for exemption under Section 10(26) can be denied relief solely for not filing a Return of Income, especially when a best judgment assessment under Section 144 was made, and if they should be granted a fresh opportunity to prove their claims.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 10(26), Section 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, : GAUHATI BENCH : GUWAHATI
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE & SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, HON’BLE
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: GAUHATI BENCH : GUWAHATI In Virtual hearing BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 50-51 / GTY / 2025 AY: 2017-18 Tajing Tapok The ITO, Ward-North B. T. Enterprise Lakhimpur Oppo. Bajaj Mandir Pasighat Bazar, East Siang PIN- 791102 (Arunachal Pradesh) PAN: ATAPD7264N (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee By: Sweta Jain, FCA Department By: Shri Kaushik Ray, JCIT Date of Hearing: 21-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 26 .08.2025
ORDER PER MANOMOHAN DAS, JM The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the (“CIT(A)” dated 24.12.2024 and 26.12.2024 respectively passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and pertains to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of agricultural tools and equipments,
Page 1 of 3
ITA no. 50-51 / GTY / 2025 Tajing Tapok -vs- The ITO, Ward-North Lakhimpur AY: 2017-18 fertilizers, pesticides, nursery etc. Along with that, he also has a BSNL franchise / stationary shop. Further, he is also a tube and tyre dealer. Return of Income for the AY 2017-18 was not filed as the assessee is eligible for exemption u/s 10(26) of the Act in respect of income accruing or arising to him from any source within the State of Arunachal Pradesh as he belongs to Minyong Tribe which is recognized as Scheduled Tribe under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes ) Order, 1950. The assessee was not registered under E-filing Portal. Unaware of the fact that assessment proceedings have been initiated, the assessee could not comply with any of the notices issued to him. Hence, order u/s 144 of the Act was passed on 29.11.2019 determining the total income as Rs. 22,52,610/-. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed 1st appeal before the earned 4. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 27.12.2024 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We observe that, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to failure in furnishing the return of income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) accepted the claim of the assessee that, the assessee can claim exemption from tax u/s 10(26) of the Act, however, the claim of the assessee from payment of tax has been denied due to non-filing of the return of income by the assessee. 7. We observe that, the ld. AO had completed the assessment of the assessee u/s 144 of the Act. The assessee failed to participate in the assessment proceedings. Since, the assessment was completed under section 144 of the Act, it is our considered opinion that, the assessee should get another opportunity to prove his claims before the ld. AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 24.12.2024 and remand the case to the file of the ld. AO for consideration afresh. We direct the ld. AO to reframe the assessment Page 2 of 3
ITA no. 50-51 / GTY / 2025 Tajing Tapok -vs- The ITO, Ward-North Lakhimpur AY: 2017-18 of the assessee after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. Both the parties also have no objection in remanding the case for re-consideration. Thus, we allow the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes only. 08. Again, as we have remanded the case of the assessee to ld. AO for reframing of the assessment, we set aside the confirmation of the penalty order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 26.12.2024. 09. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only. 10. Order pronounced in the open court on this 26th day of August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( Rajesh Kumar ) (Manomohan Das) Accountant Member Judicial Member Date: 26.08 .2025 Copy forwarded to:- 1. Tajing Tapok, B. T. Enterprise, Oppo. Bajaj Mandir, Pasighat Bazar, East Siang, PIN- 791102 (Arunachal Pradesh) 2. The ITO, Ward- North Lakhimpur 3. The Pr. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard file By Order
Assistant Registrar ITAT, Guwahati / Kolkata
Page 3 of 3
