MOHIT GARG,NEW DELHI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 16, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 2578/DEL/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shri Mohit Garg against the order of CIT(A)-28, which confirmed a penalty under section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for failing to get his accounts audited as required under section 44AB due to having gross receipts above the prescribed limit. The assessee did not appear for the hearings, citing health issues (blood cancer) as the reason for his absence. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) to allow the assessee a fair opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714660 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ TIWARI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2578/DEL/2023 [A.Y. 2013-14] Shri Mohit Garg Vs. The Dy. .C.I.T G-2, 3rd Floor Central Circle – 16 Preet Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi PAN – AYEPG4314 M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri Manoj Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 31.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 05.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, A.M:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of CIT(A)-28, dated 18.07.2023 for A.Y 2013-14. 2. None present for and on behalf of the assessee. From a perusal of record, it is evident that several opportunities were given to the assessee to present its case. However, the assessee did not avail these Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2578/DEL/2023 [A.Y. 2013-14] Mohit Garg Vs. Dy. CIT Page 2 of 4 opportunities. In these circumstances, we are left with no option but to proceed with the appeal ex parte qua the assessee on the basis of material available on record. 3. The ld. DR was heard at length. Case record carefully perused. 4. At the very outset, the ld. DR submitted that this is a case of the assessee having gross receipts above the prescribed limit of section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short]. 5. The assessee was required to get his accounts audited as per provisions of section 44AB of the Act which he failed to do so and as consequence, penalty u/s 271B of the Act of Rs. 1,50,000/- was levied on the assessee. 6. From a perusal of record, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty and the assessee’s grievance is that the ld. CIT(A) has not given adequate opportunity to explain the reasons before confirming the penalty u/s 271B of the Act. From the record, we find that the assessee has submitted an affidavit stating that he was suffering from blood cancer and because of his deteriorating health condition, he could not Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2578/DEL/2023 [A.Y. 2013-14] Mohit Garg Vs. Dy. CIT Page 3 of 4 attend before the ld. CIT(A) to explain the cause of failure of getting his books audited. 7. From a perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee, we find that because of the dire health conditions, the assessee could not attend the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) and explain his position. In view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered view that the matter be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to provide necessary information /documents as required by the authorities. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 2578/DEL/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 05.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [MADHUMITA ROY] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 05th AUGUST, 2025. VL/ Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2578/DEL/2023 [A.Y. 2013-14] Mohit Garg Vs. Dy. CIT Page 4 of 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order . 2. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictation Member 3. Date on which the typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S 7. Date on which the final Tribunal Order is uploaded by the Sr. P.S./P.S. on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal Order 9. Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judiSIS portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes for xerox 12. The date on which the file goes for endorsement 13. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 14. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the Tribunal order 15. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section 16. Date of Dispatch of the Order Printed from counselvise.com "