PRINCIPAL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX 7 vs. UNITECH ACACIA PROJECTS PVT. LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court has not yet decided the merits of the appeal. It has directed the revenue to produce the notice issued under Section 271(1)(c) and has issued notice to the assessee regarding the condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against an ITAT order that upheld a penalty imposed on the assessee for furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding late deposit and payment of TDS. The penalty was levied on amounts related to late TDS payment and late TDS deposit.
What were the issues?
Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was rightly imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars regarding late TDS deposit and payment. The court also needs to examine the notice issued under Section 271(1)(c).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 777/2023 & CM APPL. 65410/2023
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 7..... Appellant Through: Ms Pratishtha Chaudhary, proxy counsel for Mr Aseem Chawla, Senior Standing Counsel and Mr Aditya Gupta, Advocates.
versus
UNITECH ACACIA PROJECTS PVT. LTD ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
O R D E R %
18.12.2023
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL. 65411/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. ITA 777/2023 & CM APPL. 65410/2023 2. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. 3. Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 29.03.2023, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short “Tribunal”]. 4. Via the impugned order, the Tribunal sustained the order dated 30.10.2019, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short “CIT(A)”]. 5. Via the said penalty order, the respondent/assessee has been mulcted with a penalty amounting to Rs.1,95,69,800/-. Apparently, the penalty was ITA 777/2023
Page 1 of 2 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 27/03/2026 at 12:50:24
levied, because inaccurate particulars concerning late deposit and late payment of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) had been furnished. 6. The record discloses that there was late payment of TDS amounting to Rs.5,99,09,832/-. Insofar as the late deposit of TDS was concerned, the amount was pegged at Rs.1,22,09,703/-. 7. The Assessing Officer [in short, “AO”] made additions on account of aforesaid amounts; however, the CIT(A), via order dated 30.03.2017, while confirming the addition of Rs.5,99,09,832/-, scaled down the addition with regard to the other amount i.e., Rs.1,22,09703/- to Rs. 4,07,000/-. 8. The notice issued to the respondent/assessee under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “Act”] has not been placed on record. 8.1 We would like learned counsel for the appellant/revenue to place the notice on record. 9. Meanwhile, notice shall be issued to the respondent/assessee regarding the interlocutory application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 10. Accordingly, list the above-captioned matter on 15.03.2024.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J DECEMBER 18, 2023 MS
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
ITA 777/2023
Page 2 of 2
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 27/03/2026 at 12:50:24
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026