DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), NEW DELHI vs. HB ESTATE DEVELOPERS LIMITED, NEW DELHI

It emerges during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s lower appellate discussion has reversed the Assessing Officer’s action levying section 271(1)(c) penalty of Rs.1,44,77,929/- in his order dated 16.03.2022 on the ground that he had not specified the corresponding limb in the show- cause notice as to whether it is an instance of concealment or that of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income; as the case may be.

Faced with this situation, the Revenue vehemently argues that hon’ble Calcutta high court herein has recently settled the issue in assessee’s favour; and, therefore, we ought to reverse the CIT(A)’s impugned action. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole argument once we are bound by hon’ble juri ictional high court decision in PCIT Vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Ltd. in ITA no. 475 of 2019. We accordingly decline the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance in very terms.

So is the outcome of it’s main appeal ITA No. 5557/Del/2024, the assessee’s cross objection CO No. CO No. 53/Del/2025 HB Estate Developers Ltd.

This Revenue’s appeal and assessee’s CO No. 53/Del/2025 are dismissed as rendered infructuous in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 28/05/2025. (Manish Agarwal) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member