WALL ROCK INFRATECH PVT LTD,DELHI vs. JCIT, CENTRAL RANGE-4, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and remanded the matters back for fresh consideration. The assessee is to be granted an opportunity of being heard and to present evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against penalty orders under Section 271D, confirmed by the CIT(A). No one appeared on behalf of the assessee during the hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 271D was rightly confirmed without affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard. The need for a fresh hearing to consider evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI
Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY & SMT. RENU JAUHRI
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 2188/Del/2026 (A.Y 2019-20) ITA No. 2189/Del/2026 (A.Y 2020-21) ITA No. 2190/Del/2026 (A.Y 2021-22) ITA No. 2191/Del/2026 (A.Y 2022-23)
M/s Wall Rock Infratech Pvt. Vs. JCIT Ltd. C/o Advocate Deepak Central Range-4 Kapoor, 59, Nehru Apartments, Delhi Outer Ring Road, Kalkaji, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCWQ3055H
Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Kr. Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16/07/2026 Date of pronouncement 16/07/2026
O R D E R PER BENCH The bunch of appeals filed by the Assessee are directed against all
orders dated 30.12.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax
(Appeals)-26, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] under Section
250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for
Assessment Years 2019-20 to 2022-23 respectively.
Since all the appeals relate to the same assessee these are heard
analogously and are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of
convenience.
2 ITA Nos 2188 to 2191/Del/2026 Wall Rock Infratecdh Pvt. Ltd.
The matter relates to penalty under Section 271D of the Act confirmed
by the First Appellate Authority dated 30.12.2025 arising out of the order
dated 27.09.2024 passed by the Central Range-4, Delhi.
None appeared on behalf of the Assessee inspite of notice having been
served. Since, admittedly, an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in
each matters in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice we would like to
give a further opportunity to the Assessee to represent the case before the
authorities below effectively and thus, all these appeals are disposed of by
setting aside the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for consideration of the
same afresh upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the Assessee
and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which
the Assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter.
We further make it clear that in the event the Assessee does not co-
operate with the First Appellate Authority, the said authority would be at
liberty to proceed and finalize the issues strictly in accordance with law.
All the appeals filed by the Assessee are therefore, allowed for
statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16/07/2026.
(RENU JAUHRI) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 16/07/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS
3 ITA Nos 2188 to 2191/Del/2026 Wall Rock Infratecdh Pvt. Ltd.
More judgments on Section 271D
- Sujatha Vaddanapu, Nalgonda vs ITO, Ward-1, NalgondaITA 2048/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Inder Lal Ramrakhyani, Dhamtari vs ITO, DhamtariITA 694/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Harshit Singhania Buildcon, RaipurITA 560/RPR/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shree Jalaram Finance, Borsad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(4), PetladITA 1785/AHD/2026[2000-01]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Veera Mani Kumari Vattikooti, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward -11(1), HyderabadITA 1218/HYD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026