ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE-7, NEW DELHI V. PEC LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 4557/DEL/2018

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals related to the issue of under invoicing of income by PEC Ltd. for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13. The appeals were filed against the orders of the CIT(A)-38, New Delhi, which had reversed the assessment findings of the Addl. CIT. The Tribunal noted that similar issues had been previously adjudicated in favor of the assessee in the preceding assessment year and referenced several judicial precedents that supported the assessee's position. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the lack of new evidence or cogent supportive material from the Revenue to justify a departure from the established judicial findings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839817 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 8 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2018
• Other Referred Cases: M/s Sesa Sterlite Ltd. Vs. ACIT, PCIT Vs. Rawmin Mining and Industries P. Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSRA
• Section: 147; 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Naveen Chandra, Accountant Member ITA No. 4557/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi-110002 Vs PEC Ltd., 9th Floor, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACT0101G ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 PEC Ltd., 9th Floor, Hansalaya, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 Vs DCIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACT0101G Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 23.02.2026 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These Revenue’s and the assessee’s appeals i.e. ITA No. 4557/Del/2018 for A.Y. 2011-12 and ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 for A.Y. 2012-13 arise against the CIT(A)-38, New Delhi’s as many orders dated 08.01.2018 and 25.06.2019 passed in case No.83/2017-18 and 353/2018-19, in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 and u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4557/Del/2018 ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 PEC Ltd. 2 2. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We thus proceed ex-parte against the assessee in both these cases. 3. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues in the Revenue’s appeal ITA No. 4557/Del/2018 that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in reversing the assessment findings adding an amount of Rs.2,50,22,861/- in the assessee’s hands as under invoicing of income; in assessment order dated 30.03.2016 despite the fact that the same was based on the recommendations of hon’ble justice M.B. Shah Commission. 4. That being the case, we note from a perusal of the case records that the assessee has not only succeeded on the very issue in preceding assessment year 2010-11 but also various judicial precedents i.e. hon’ble Bombay high court at Goa in Writ Petition No. 141/2015 in M/s Sesa Sterlite Ltd. Vs. ACIT along with other similar batch of cases decided on 09.07.2019 has even quashed the corresponding reopening action(s) initiated by the learned departmental authorities on the basis of the very report (supra). And also that hon’ble Gujarat high court in Tax Appeal No. 746/2019 decided on 13.01.2020 PCIT Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4557/Del/2018 ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 PEC Ltd. 3 Vs. Rawmin Mining and Industries P. Ltd. has further upheld the tribunal’s action deciding the very issue of under invoicing of income addition based on the very report and in absence of the corresponding cogent supportive evidence by the learned departmental authorities. 5. Faced with this situation, we hereby notice that apart from going by the said report, learned assessing authority nowhere discussed any actual evidence of under invoicing of income at the assessee’s behest which further appears to have succeeded in the preceding assessment year 2010-11 as well. We thus find no reason to accept the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance which is hereby rejected therefore. So is the outcome of it’s main appeal ITA No. 4557/Del/2018. 6. The assessee’s appeal ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 on the hand also raises the very sole substantive grievance that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in making under invoicing of sales addition amounting to Rs.1,61,60,979/-; in assessment order dated 31.03.2015 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 7. Suffice to say, once it turns out that this issue is very much similar as in the preceding assessment year, we find no Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 4557/Del/2018 ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 PEC Ltd. 4 reason to sustain the same by adopting judicial consistency. The same is directed to be deleted therefore. The assessee succeeds in appeal ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 in very terms. 8. This Revenue’s appeal ITA Nos. 4557/Del/2018 is dismissed and the assessee’s appeal ITA No. 7305/Del/2019 is allowed; in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 23/02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Naveen Chandra) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 26/02/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Printed from counselvise.com "