PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI (CENTRAL-3) vs SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL

$~18 to 21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 189/2023 + ITA 190/2023 + ITA 191/2023 + ITA 192/2023

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI (CENTRAL-3)

..... Appellant Through: Mr Abhishek Maratha, Sr Standing Counsel with Mr Akshat Singh, Advocate.

versus

SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL

..... Respondent Through: Mr Rohit Jain with Mr Aniket D Agrawal and Mr Samarth Chaudhari, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

O R D E R %

29.03.2023 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM Appl.15197/2023 in ITA 189/2023[Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 218 days in re-filing the appeal] CM Appl.15566/2023 in ITA 190/2023[Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 218 days in re-filing the appeal] CM Appl.15567/2023 in ITA 191/2023[Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 118 days in re-filing the appeal] CM Appl.15568/2023 in ITA 192/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay of 218 days in re-filing the appeal] ITA 189/2023 & connected matters

1/3

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:33:26

The appellant/revenue has filed these applications for condonation of delay in re-filing the appeals. 2. Mr Rohit Jain, who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, says that he would have no objection if the prayers made in the above- captioned applications filed in each of the appeals are allowed. 2.1 It is ordered accordingly. 3. The applications are disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.

ITA 189/2023 ITA 190/2023 ITA 191/2023 ITA 192/2023

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, the “Tribunal”], via a common order dated 24.06.2021, has ruled that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, the “Act”] could not have been levied on the respondent/assessee as the quantum addition was deleted. 4.1 Quantum addition was made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on the ground that the respondent/assessee had received notional interest in respect of the amounts purportedly held by him in a bank account. 4.2 In this regard, the Tribunal relied upon the order dated 20.12.2019 passed in MA Nos.780 to 783/DEL/2019 in ITA Nos.4125 to 4128/DEL/2016. 5. We may note that the appellant/revenue has preferred appeals [i.e., ITA Nos.104/2021, 107/2021, 108/2021 & 109/2021] qua the said order, which are listed before the court on 25.05.2023. ITA 189/2023 & connected matters

2/3 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 12:33:26

Accordingly, list the above-captioned appeals on the same date, i.e., 25.05.2023.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

MARCH 29, 2023/pmc

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

ITA 189/2023 & connected matters

3/3

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI (CENTRAL-3) vs. SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL