What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's justification for non-compliance and, in the interest of justice, remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee was directed to comply with future notices.

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-compliance with statutory notices. The assessee claimed compelling reasons prevented them from complying and that the non-compliance was neither intentional nor mala fide.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A) violated the assessee's right to natural justice due to non-compliance with notices, and if the reasons for non-compliance were justifiable.

Preeti Arora, Moti Nagar vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Pronounced: 08.07.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िद�ी पीठ�, नई िद�ी INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 1702/DEL/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2017-18) PREETI ARORA INCOME TAX OFFICER E-51, GROUND FLOOR, MOTI WARD 35(8), CIVIC CENTRE Vs. NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110015, NEW DELHI-110002, DELHI DELHI अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: CBCPA6171P

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: Shri Chandan Mishra, CA ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Balkrishan Gopal, SR DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 02.07.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 08.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, New Delhi, dated 19.12.2025 arising out of assessment order dated 19.12.2019 passed under section u/s 144 of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed its case ex-parte and thus its right to natural justice of being heard has been violated. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee was prevented by compelling

ITA 1702/DEL/2026 PREETI ARORA

person reason were making requisite compliance to the statutory notices of ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that the impugned conduct of the assessee was neither intentional nor mala fide. It was accordingly requested that the matter be kindly considered for remission back to the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication de novo. The ld. Counsel personally ensured that full compliance shall now been made.

The ld. DR while relying upon the order of the lower authorities did not seriously oppose the move. 4. We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The misconduct of the assessee in not complying to the statutory notices of the ld. First Appellate Authority are evident from the assailed appellate order dated 19.12.2025. We are however in agreement with the justification tendered for the impugned non- compliance. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant benefits by non- prosecution of its case. Accordingly in the interest of justice, we remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication de novo in accordance with law, while affording opportunity of being heard and by passing a speaking order. The assessee shall be bounden to comply with statutory notices issued and any non-compliance shall be adversely viewed. The appeal of the assessee is therefore allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Sd/- Order pronounced in the open court on 08th July, 2026. - Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 08.07.2026

Page 2 of 3

ITA 1702/DEL/2026 PREETI ARORA

Shekhar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi,

Page 3 of 3

PREETI ARORA,MOTI NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments