M/S. UNITECH RELIABLE PROJECTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI V. DCIT, CIRCLE-27(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 9005/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Unitech Reliable Projects P. Ltd., the appellant, contesting a penalty notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, the respondent. The penalty notice, dated 30.11.2017, was challenged on the grounds that it was issued in a mechanical manner without proper application of mind, and it contained ambiguous charges which were not clearly specified. The Tribunal examined the notice and found it to be defective as it mentioned both 'concealed the particulars of income' and 'furnish inaccurate particulars of income' without striking off the irrelevant charge. This led to the setting aside of the penalty.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713121 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. DCIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MONIKA SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: D.C GARG; CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “एफ”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं मनीष अŤवाल, लेखाकार सद˟ क े समƗ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.9005/िदʟी/2019(िन.व. 2015-16) ITA No.9005/DEL/2019(A.Y.2015-16) Unitech Reliable Projects P. Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 PAN: AAACU-8206-H ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, CR Building, New Delhi 110002 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent Assessee by : Shri D.C Garg, Chartered Accountant Department by : Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 30/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)] dated 30.10.2019, for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee at this stage is only pressing ground no. 5 of appeal assailing validity of penalty notice issued u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The notice dated 30.11.2017 issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) does not clearly Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.9005/Del/2019 (AY 2015-16) specify the charge u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for which penalty is to be levied. The notice is issued in a mechanical manner without proper application of mind. The ld. AR placed on record copy of the said notice. He submitted that where the notice is ambiguous and irrelevant clauses are not struck of, notice becomes defective and not penalty can be levied on the basis of defective notice. In support of his submissions he placed reliance on the decision of the Full Bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. DCIT reported as 125 taxmann.com 253. 3. Per contra, Ms. Monika Singh representing the department vehemently defended the penalty order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. 4. Both sides heard. The assessee in appeal has assailed validity of penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act on the ground of defective notice. The assessee has placed on record copy of notice issued u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, the same is extracted herein below:- Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.9005/Del/2019 (AY 2015-16) A bare perusal of notice would show that the same has been issued in an omnibus manner. The irrelevant charge for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act has not been struck of by the AO. The notice mentions both charges of section 271(1)(c) of the Act i.e. “concealed the particulars of income” and “furnish inaccurate particulars of income” with conjunction “or”. This makes the notice ambiguous. It is a well settled legal proposition that where there is ambiguity in mentioning of charge in the notice, the notice becomes defective. (RE: Mohd. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.9005/Del/2019 (AY 2015-16) Farhan A. Shaikh vs. DCIT reported as 125 taxmann.com 253.) Any proceedings arises from defective notice are vitiated. 5. Thus, in facts of the case and in light of the decision referred above, we find merit in ground no. 5 of appeal. Thus, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 30th day of July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 30/07/2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "