M/S AMRIT BOTTLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,WEST BENGAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8941/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 August 2026AY 2023-245 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty is not sustainable in law because the penalty notices issued by the Assessing Officer did not specify the corresponding limb(s) under Section 271AAB. The Revenue's contentions were rejected.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Amrit Bottlers Private Limited, is aggrieved by a penalty of Rs. 6,25,86,306/- levied under Section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act. The penalty was confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty levied under Section 271AAB is valid when the penalty notices fail to specify the relevant limb(s) of the section.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 11.08.2026Pronounced: 17.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 8941/Del/2025; Assessment Year: 2023-24 M/s Amrit Bottlers Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of A-3, 7th Floor, Madhusudan Appts, Income Tax, P-18, Dobson Lanehowrah, Central Circle-6, Howrah- 711101, Jhandewalan Extension, West Bengal New Delhi- 55 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCA4794J Assessee by: Sh. Subhash Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 11.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 17.08.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment years 2023-24, arises against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s order dated 28.10.2025, passed in order no. 10096/2022-23, involving proceedings under section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

2.

We now advert to the first and foremost legal issue between parties. The assessee is admittedly aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ action levying section 271AAB penalty of Rs. 6,25,86,306/- in its hands; in the Assessing Officer’s order dated 30.03.2025 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, Mr. Agarwal refers to the assessee’s paperbook at pages 4 to 6 compiling the Assessing Officer’s impugned penalty notices issued on 18.07.2024, 02.09.2024 & 04.11.2024 on as many occasions nowhere specifying the corresponding limb(s) u/s 271AAB of the Act. He next quotes DCIT Vs Sanjay Singh in ITA No. 6942/Del/2019 decided on 28.11.2019 that such a failure is very much fatal to the impugned penalty; as follows: “

2 | P a g e

3 | P a g e

” 4 | P a g e

4.

We adopt that the learned co-ordinate bench’s above extracted detailed discussion mutatis mutandis to conclude that the impugned penalty in the assessee’s case herein is not sustainable in law. The Revenue’s vehement contentions in support thereof are hereby rejected in very terms therefore.

All other remaining pleadings between the parties stand rendered academic.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.08.2026 .

Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 17.08.2026 *Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

5 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 271AAB

All 797 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →