ASHIM TALWAR,DELHI vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, DELGI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 972/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 July 2026AY 2019-20203 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities erred in invoking the penalty provision. Based on the seized material and unrebutted statements, the penalties under Section 271DA were deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were against penalties levied under Section 271DA of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2019-20 and 2020-21. The penalties were based on departmental search action and statements admitting receipt of sums from the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271DA was rightly invoked for receiving sums in contravention of Section 269ST, based on seized material and admissions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271DA,Section 269ST

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Durbey, Sr. DR
Hearing: 13.07.2026Pronounced: 13.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 972 & 973/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20 & 2020-21

Ashim Talwar Vs Additional Commissioner of Farm 4 1773-1782, Radhay Mohan Income Tax Drive, Bandh Road, Central Range- 4, New Delhi- 110 074 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACPT5368C

Assessee by: Sh. None Revenue by : Ms. Priyanka Durbey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 13.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 13.07.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

These assessee’s twin appeals i.e., ITA Nos. 972 & 973/Del/2026 arise against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, ‘learned CIT(A)’), Delhi’s orders both dated 31.10.2025, passed in DIN & Orders no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1082196996(1) & ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1082196505(1), involving proceedings u/s 271DA of the Income Tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’.

Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2 2. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 29 days in filing of the instant appeals is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

Learned senior DR Miss Priyanka Durbey, vehemently submits during the course of hearing that the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) herein have rightly levied the impugned section 271DA penalties which form the sole subject matter of tribunal’s adjudication herein.

4.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’ respective pleadings against and in support of the impugned identical section 271DA penalties. We make it clear that the impugned penalty provision gets attracted in an instance when the assessee concerned is found to have “received” any sum in specified transaction in contravention of the provisions of section 269ST of the Act. The Revenue’s case all along is that the penalty(ies) herein deserves to be upheld as the same is based on the relevant seized material as per the departmental search action dated 03.02.2021 in M/s Samir Modi group of cases. A perusal of the case records reveals that the learned Assessing Officer in assessee’s connected quantum appeal ITA No. 1065/Del/2026 for assessment year 2021-22 observes that the departmental authorities recorded search statement of Shri Amit Upreti admitting the corresponding identical sums including the ones herein as “received from” Shri Ashim Talwar/ appellant than that paid to him. This clinching factual position has gone unrebutted

3 from the Revenue side. We, accordingly of the considered view that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in invoking the impugned penalty provision in the assessee’s case. This identical penalty u/s 271DA herein stands deleted in very terms therefore. All other remaining pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.

5.

These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos. 972 & 973/Del/2026 are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27.07.2026 *Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

More judgments on Section 271DA

All 211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271DA →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →