PCIT, DELHI-7 vs. M/S VICTORY TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD.

O R D E R % 02.08.2022 C.M.No.33517/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the Order dated 16th February, 2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA 6231/Del./2017 for the Assessment Year 2009-10. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT failed to appreciate that the penalty proceedings could not have been held to be bad in law in the absence of quantum assessment proceedings reaching finality. He also states that the ITAT has erred in upholding the order of CIT(A) by This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/06/2026 at 01:49:21

substituting its own view without appreciating that the same is cryptic, non- speaking and without reasons. A perusal of the paper book reveals that both CIT(A) and the ITAT have observed that the quantum appeal against the assessment order framed under Section 153A of the Act was decided by the ITAT in favour of the assessee on the ground that the additions were made by the Assessing Officer in absence of the incriminating material. This Court is of the view that the present Case is covered by the decision of this Court in PCIT vs. M/s Harsh International Pvt. Ltd. [ITA 620/2019] wherein it was held as under:

“10. This court is also of the opinion that levy of penalty cannot be a matter of course, as sought to be contended by the Revenue. It can only be levied in cases where the concealment of income has been proven. If the quantum order itself has been challenged and this Court has framed substantial questions of law in the appeal preferred by the respondent assessee, it shows that the alleged concealment is not final and the issue is disputable. Consequently, the penalty levied by the assessing officer cannot survive in such a case.

debatable issue. We may also note that against the quantum assessment where under deduction under Section 14A of the Act was prescribed to the assessee, the assessee has preferred an appeal in this Court under Section 260A of the Act which has also been admitted and substantial question of law framed. This itself shows that the issue is debatable. For these reasons, we are of the opinion that no question of law arises in the present case.” B) Order dated 3rd March, 2014 passed by this Court in CIT Vs. Thomson Press India Ltd(supra):- “This Court is of the opinion that where the question of law as raised by the assessee has been framed and admitted in the circumstances of this case, imposition of penalty cannot be justified. The appeals being bereft of substantial question of law are dismissed.”