Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Mmc And H Pharmacies,Hapur vs Nfac, Delhi on 18 February, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH 'E': NEW DELHI
BEFORE
SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.5482/Del/2024, A.Y. 2017-18
MMC and H Pharmacies, Assessing Officer,
311-Abu Lane NFAC,
52-Moh, Math Maliyan, Vs. India
Pillkhuma Dehat,
Hapur, Uttar Pradesh
PAN: ABBFM1135G
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by None
Respondent by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing 04/02/2026
Date of Pronouncement 04/02/2026
ORDER
PER RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN , J.M. :
This appeal is filed by the assessee /appellant against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] dated 1 ITA No. 5482/Del/2025 MMC and H Pharmacies 13.09.2024 wherein the penalty order imposed by Assessing Officer ('AO') u/s 271A of the Act for not maintaining the books of accounts was confirmed.
2.Aggrieved by the impugned order assessee is in appeal before us and has raised following grounds: -
"1. In view of the facts circumstances and written aguments placed on record the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not justified in ignoring the submission made by the appellant/assessee and thereby by confirming the penalty imposed u/s 271A, by Assessing Officer is most arbitrary and in any case highly excessive uncalled for and liable to be cancelled.
2. The assessee craves leave to take additional grounds of apepal or at the time of hearing of the appeal and/or modify any of the above grounds."
3. The facts in brief as culled out from the appellant proceedings are that the appellant, an individual, has not filed return of income for A.Y. 2017-18. As per information with the department, the appellant has made cash deposits of Rs. 1,08,03,500/- in the current bank account maintained with Bank of Baroda, Mansopur Branch, Muzararnagar during the financial year 2016-17 and has earned interest of income of Rs. 15,510/- u/s 194A of the Act. Since no return of income was filed, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act. Various statutory notices were issued to the appellant and thereafter appellant has filed return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 21.09.2021 declaring the loss at Rs. 4,159/-. The assessment proceedings were completed and addition of Rs. 8,68,439/- was made on 2 ITA No. 5482/Del/2025 MMC and H Pharmacies account of business income. The said assessment order was challenged before the Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed it. Separate penalty proceedings were initiated and vide impugned penalty order dated 22.09.2022, a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- was imposed u/s 271A of the Act on the ground that the assessee has not maintained the books of accounts and document mandatory required u/s 44AA of the Act. The said penalty order was challenged which was confirmed by the impugned order.
4. We have heard Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. DR for the Revenue and examined the report. The only contention raised before us is that the impugned order has been passed without following principle of natural justice because the written arguments placed on record before the Ld. CIT(A) has not been considered. After going through the impugned order, we have noticed that there was nothing to rebut the said arguments raised on behalf of the assessee/appellant by the Revenue and on perusal of the impugned order, it is noticed that there is no mention of filing of written argument or affording opportunity of hearing by the Ld. CIT(A).
5. In these facts and circumstances, the impugned order is not sustainable as the same has been passed by not following the principle of natural justice. The impugned order is accordingly set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh after affoding 3 ITA No. 5482/Del/2025 MMC and H Pharmacies opportunity of hearing and consideing the written arguments/ material submitted by the assessee/appellant. The appellant shall present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) within the period of 60 days from this order. The appeal of the assessee is disposed of and accordingly allowed.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open Court on 4th February, 2025 Sd/- Sd/-
(AMITABH SHUKLA) (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated:18/02/2026
Binita, Sr. PS
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT/PCIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. Sr. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT, NEW DELHI
4