INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), DELHI, DELHI V. ANOVA INFRACON PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 4313/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the Revenue against Anova Infracon Pvt. Ltd. concerning penalties imposed for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The penalties were initially levied following a search and subsequent assessment which added a substantial amount to the company's income. However, these additions were later deleted by the CIT(A), leading to the deletion of the penalties. The Revenue challenged this decision, arguing that the penalties were justified based on the initial additions and the assessee's failure to adequately respond during the assessment proceedings. The Tribunal, after reviewing the circumstances and the CIT(A)'s decision, upheld the deletion of the penalties, citing the absence of any remaining concealed income post the CIT(A)'s adjustments.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789662 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JITENDER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJKUMARI
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 143(3); 154; 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"ITA Nos.4312 & 4313/Del/2025 Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “A” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.4312 & 4313/Del/2025 [Assessment Year : 2011-12 & 2012-13] ITO Ward-2(1),Room No.375, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. vs Anova Infracon Pvt.Ltd., K-1, Sector-10, R.K.Puram, New Delhi-110022. PAN-AAICA8999D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR Assessee by Ms. Rajkumari, CA Date of Hearing 24.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.11.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : Both the captioned appeals are filed by the Revenue against the separate orders, both dated 05.05.2025 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Delhi-31 [“Ld.CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of the penalty order dated 26.08.2016 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for AY 2011-12 and penalty order dated 31.08.2016 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for AY 2012-13. 2. As these captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are having common issue of deletion of penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act therefore, these two appeals filed by the Revenue are decided by a common order. 3. First we take the Revenue’s appeal in ITA No. 4312/Del/2025 for AY 2011-12. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4312 & 4313/Del/2025 Page | 2 ITA No.4312/Del/2025 [Assessment Year : 2011-12] 4. Brief facts of the case are that in this case consequent to the search, assessment was completed at a total income of INR 10,10,00,000/- vide assessment order dated 30.03.2016 passed u/s 144/153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act and initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for concealment of income in respect of the addition of Rs. 10,10,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Act. Being aggrieved with the addition made, the appellant had filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who deleted the additions vide order dated 24.03.2025 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-35/10395/2019-20. In the meantime, AO completed the pending penalty proceedings and levied the penalty of Rs. 7,21,31,801/- for concealment of income which was reduced to Rs. 3,35,49,675/- in terms of the rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act on 31.08.2016. 5. Against the said order of penalty, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 05.05.2025, allowed the appeal of the assessee and deleted the penalty by observing that since the addition is deleted, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) does not survived. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:- 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 3,35,49,675 which was imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty without appreciating the facts that addition of Rs. 10,10,00,000/- was made, as the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings has not responded to the Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4312 & 4313/Del/2025 Page | 3 various notices issued while passing the assessment order and hence failed to discharge its onus for explaining the genuineness of transaction. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty which imposed on quantum addition of Rs. 10,10,00,000/- by not appreciating the facts that AO in its assessment order has clearly stated that during the post search inquiries, Yamuna Express Way Industrial Development Authority (YEIDA) has confirmed the above said payment made by the assessee company to them. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty as while making quantum addition in the case of assessee was completed ex-parte and Ld. CIT(A) has not given opportunity to the AO for examining the books of the assessee and further treatment of payment made to YEIDA by the third party (M/s Sidh Automobiles Ltd.) on behalf of the assessee. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter OR amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before OR during the course of the hearing of E the appeal. 7. Heard the contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. It is seen that the quantum additions made by the AO in the instant case were deleted by ld. CIT(A) vide its order dated 24.03.2025 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi-35/10395/2019-20. Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has taken note of this fact. Since after the order of CIT(A) deleting the additions made, no income remained which could be held as concealed income or for which the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, we find no error in the order of Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the penalty. Accordingly, we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal of the revenue are dismissed. 8. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4312 & 4313/Del/2025 Page | 4 ITA No.4313/Del/2025 [Assessment Year : 2012-13] 9. Now we take up the appeal of Revenue in ITA No. 4313/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2012-13. 10. Heard the contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. In this appeal, facts are similar and identical to the facts of revenue’s appeal in ITA No.4312/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2011-12 where we have confirmed the order of ld. CIT(A) deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. IN this year also the quantum addition made on which penalty is levied are deleted by ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 24.03.2025 in Appeal No. CIT(A),Delhi-35/10060/2019-20. Thus, by respectfully following the observations made in revenues’ appeal for AY 2011-12 herein above, which are applied Mutatis Mutandis to the facts of case under consideration, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal of the revenue are dismissed. 11. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 12. In the final result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos. 4312 & 4313/Del/2025 [Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13] are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 27.11.2025 *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S* (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4312 & 4313/Del/2025 Page | 5 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT 6. Guard File ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "