KHEM SINGH,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 67(7), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3712/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 July 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the quantum appeal related to the additions had been remanded back to the AO. Therefore, the penalty proceedings were also remitted to the AO to decide afresh after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee sold an immovable property for Rs. 39,12,500/- and did not file a return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions to the income and initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c). The penalty was levied at Rs. 1,99,800/- after the appeal to the NFAC was dismissed.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the underlying quantum additions have been remanded. Whether the penalty order was passed in accordance with Section 275 of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 147,Section 148,Section 275

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F” NEWDELHI

Before: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR & SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 08.07.2026Pronounced: 17.07.2026

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH “F” NEWDELHI

BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.3712/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Mr. Khem Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-67(7) B- House No. 7 Sawan Park Block Civic Centre New Delhi- Guru Ravidas Mandir 110002 Street Ashok Vihar Phase- III Delhi-110052 PAN No. AYGPS8517A

And also at: Mr. Khem Singh C/o VK Sabharwal, Sabharwal & Partners, 4819/24, Mathur Lane, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by Sh. V. K. Sabharwal, Adv. Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 08.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 17.07.2026

ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR JM:

The assessee preferred the appeal, challenging the order dated

06-02-2025 passed by The National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi (in

short “Ld. NFAC”) passed by Assessing Officer dated 27-12-2021 for

A.Y. 2012-13 under the section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,

1961(In short “the Act”).

2.

The assessee following grounds in appeal:

1.

That the initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) of the I.T. Acton 31-10-

2019 and levied by order dated 27-12-2021 of Rs.1,99,800/- as has

been upheld by Ld. CIT(A) by order dated 06-02-2026 becomes non-est

under the law and to the facts of this case as such not tenable because

of remand the matter against the quantum of additions so made in ITA

No. 4548/D/2025 on 28-08-2025 and consequently passing fresh

orders thereafter by A.O. on 01-12-2025.

2.

That the penalty order passed on 27-12-2021 u/s 271(1)(c ) of the

Act if further incorrect as against Article 14 of the Constitution of

India, because of not following/ taken into consideration the proper

proposition of law contained u/s 275 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 while

levy of the illegal and impugned penalty of Rs.1,99,800/- against the

law and to the facts of the case.

3.

That the appellant assessee assail his right to amend alter or change

any grounds of appeal at any time even during the course of hearing of

this instant appeal

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the as per information available with the department that the assessee had sold immovable property situated at Village Wazipur Delhi -110052 for a sale of consideration of Rs.39,12,500/- and did not file his return of Income. The case of the assessee was reopened and notice under section 147 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In the response of the notice under section 148 of the Act the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of RS. 1,71,780/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment order after making the addition of Rs. 9,78,125/- and assessed the total income at Rs.11,49,905/- and penalty proceedings was also initiated. The assessing Officer also issued the show cause notice for the penalty proceedings but no submissions was filed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer levied the penalty of Rs. 1,99,800/- under section 271(1)(c ) of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. NFAC, who vide his order dated 06-02-2026 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the tribunal. 3

6.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the quantum appeal has already been remanded back to the Assessing Officer for his appropriate adjudication. This fact fairly admitted by the Ld. DR. During the course of hearing the assessee has also filed the copy of the order of the ITA No. 4548/Del/2025 for A.Y.2012-13 to prove that the quantum appeal of the assessee has been remanded back to the Ld. Assessing Officer. Because the quantum appeal has already been remanded back to the Ld. Assessing Officer, therefore we remit the issue to the file of Assessing Officer to decide as a fresh after giving the opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The appeal is allowed for the statistical purpose. 7. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 17/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

(RAMIT KOCHAR) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER Dated: 17 /07 /2026 “SR BHATNAGAR” Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Delhi

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →