AAMBY VALLEY CITY LIMTIED,MUMBAI vs. DLC-CC-(1)(6), CENTRAL CIRCLE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3446/Del/2026 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Aamby Valley City Ltd. Vs. DLC-CC-(1)(6) Hotel Sahara Star, Opposite NCC DIT (S) Jhandewalan Ext. Domestic Airport, Ville Parle New Delhi – 110 055 (E), Mumbai, Sahara, P&amp T Colony SO Mumbai Maharastra - 400099 PAN No. AAGCA 0045 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Arpit Goyal, C.A. Revenue by Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing: 04.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 04.08.2026

ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 20.01.2026 arising from the penalty order dated 14.01.2025 passed by Asstt./Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, New Delhi under section 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

ITA No. 3446/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2012-13] Aamby Valley City Ltd. vs. DLC-CC-(1)(6) 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under : 1. “That the order dated 20.01.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] upholding levy of penalty of Rs.7,12,80,340 on the Appellant under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for assessment year 2012-13 is invalid, bad in law, against the principles of natural justice and liable to be set aside. 2. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding levy of penalty without granting adequate opportunity to file submission of merits and allowing opportunity of oral hearing, in gross violation of statutory mandate and principles of natural justice. On merits 3. Without prejudice, that the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding levy of penalty on the ground of “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income”, not appreciating that the Appellant had truly and fully disclosed all material facts in respect of the disputed amounts, in the return of income and during the course of quantum assessment proceedings. 4. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding levy of penalty not appreciating that the Appellant had offered valid/ bona fide explanation in respect of the disputed amounts. 5. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in upholding levy of penalty in respect of (a) addition on account of advance against customer and, (b) disallowance on account of commission & brokerage, ignoring that there is inconsistency in the charge for levy of penalty in the assessment order vis-à-vis penalty order passed under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete, modify or vary the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of the hearing.”

ITA No. 3446/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2012-13] Aamby Valley City Ltd. vs. DLC-CC-(1)(6) addition to the tune of Rs.27,81,674/- and allowed substantial relief to the assessee amounting to Rs.479,31,50,89,760/- and set aside certain issues and restored them to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. In the ensuing set-aside proceedings, the AO passed a fresh assessment order on 26.12.2019, making additions on the set- aside issues amounting to Rs.125,87,92,210/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-23, Delhi who, vide order dated 31.01.2024 in Appeal No. 23/10304/2019-20, provided partial relief to the assessee. However, additions aggregating to Rs.21,96,95,916/- were sustained. Consequent to the CIT(A)'s order, the assessee as well as department preferred an appeal before Hon’ble ITAT, Delhi. 5. Thereafter, the AO levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act by order dated 14.01.2025 amounting to Rs.7,12,80,340/- for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income against additions aggregating to Rs.21,96,95,916/- which were sustained by CIT(A). Aggrieved by the Penalty Order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed this appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) upheld the order of the penalty by observing as under : “The penalty of Rs. 7,12,80,340 was levied on the ground of concealment/furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding the additions of Rs. 21,96,95,916. It is a matter of record that the appellant has not submitted any explanation on merit, therefore I am not inclined to interfere with the order of AO. Page 3 of 6

ITA No. 3446/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2012-13] Aamby Valley City Ltd. vs. DLC-CC-(1)(6) 17. In the result, the penalty of Rs.7,12,80,340/- levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act is hereby upheld. The appeal is dismissed.” 6. Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before us. 7. At the outset, learned Counsel of the assessee stated that the CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order and prayed for setting aside the order to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 8. Per contra, learned DR did not raise any serious objection and relied upon the order of authorities below. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the CIT(A) had given opportunities to the assessee and in absence of any response from the assessee, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. We are of the considered view that in the interest of natural justice, the CIT(A) may give reasonable opportunity to the assessee to represent the case and therefore, we are of the view that the issues of the case be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to accord three effective opportunities to the assessee and assessee is likewise directed to avail the opportunities and submit documents/evidence as required by the CIT(A). The appeal of the assessee is decided in aforesaid terms.

Page 4 of 6

ITA No. 3446/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2012-13] Aamby Valley City Ltd. vs. DLC-CC-(1)(6) 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (NAVEEN CHANDRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 12.08.2026 Priti Yadav, Sr. Ps* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

Page 5 of 6