Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Gauhati
Abdus Sukur Ahmed,Dhubri vs Ito, Ward - Dhubri, Dhubri on 13 March, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'GAUHATI BENCH', GUWAHATI
BEFORE SHRIDUVVURU RL REDDY, VP
AND
SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
ITA No. 358/GTY/2025
( Assessment Year: 2020-21)
Abdus Sukur Ahmed
ITO, Ward-Dhubri
Salmara PT iii, Salmara,
Dhubri-783301,
Bondihana B.O., Salmara PT.III, Vs. Assam
Dhubri-783349, Assam
(Appellant) (Respondent)
PAN No. AOQPA7538D
Assessee by : Shri S.P. Bhati, AR
Revenue by : Shri Dipak Singh, DR
Date of hearing: 10.03.2026
Date of pronouncement: 13.03.2026
ORDER
PER BENCH:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "Ld. CIT(A)"] dated 19.09.2025 for the AY 2020-21.
2. The first issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) upholding the order of ld. AO wherein the relief claimed u/s 89(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was denied by the ld. AO on the ground that the assessee has not filed the form 10E before filing the ITR in the impugned assessment year nor did file the form 10E Page | 2 ITA No. 358/GTY/2025 Abdus Sukur Ahmed; A.Y. 2020-21 online with regard to relief claimed u/s 89(1) of the Act and accordingly, denied the relief claimed by the assessee.
3. The second issue raised by the assessee is against the confirmation of addition of ₹1,12,080/-, which was on account of discrepancy between the form 26AS and the salary disclosure by the assessee.
4. At the outset, we observe that there is no compliance before the ld.
CIT (A) and therefore the CIT (A) decided the appeal ex-parte by upholding the order of the ld. AO. We also note that the ld. AO has disallowed the relief claimed by the assessee u/s 89(1) of the Act on the technical ground that form 10E was not filed before the due date of filing the return or e-filed within the stipulated date. In our opinion, the assessee is entitled to claim the relief u/s 89(1) of the Act, the calculation qua which has been extracted by the ld. AO in the assessment order by the ld. AO as well as in the appellate order by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). In our opinion, the relief claimed by the assessee u/s 89(1) of the Act cannot be denied for the technical breach. Consequently, we set aside the order of ld. CIT (A) on this issue and direct the ld. AO to allow the relief as claimed by the assessee u/s 89(1) of the Act. The issue number 1 is allowed.
5. So far as the second issue of discrepancy of suppressed salary is concerned, we restore the same to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to decide the same after taking into account the evidences filed by the assessee as well as form 26AS, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing the assessee.
Page | 3 ITA No. 358/GTY/2025 Abdus Sukur Ahmed; A.Y. 2020-21
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
(RAJESH KUMAR) (DUVVURU RL REDDY)
( ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ) (VICE PRESIDENT)
Guwahati, Dated: 13.03.2026
Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT,
5. Guard file.
BY ORDER,
True Copy//
Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati