THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -12 vs. ANURAG DALMIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA - 279 / 2023HC Delhi16 May 20232 pages
For Petitioner: RUCHIR BHATIA
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court admitted the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's order concerning penalty. Notice was issued to the assessee, and the appeal was listed for further hearing.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that sustained the CIT(A)'s decision to set aside penalty orders. The ITAT's decision was based on the assessee succeeding in the quantum proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can be sustained when the quantum addition has been deleted in appeal. The High Court has admitted the appeal to decide this.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 279/2023

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -12..... Appellant Through: Mr Pratyaksh Gupta, Jr Standing Counsel.

versus

ANURAG DALMIA

..... Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

O R D E R %

16.05.2023

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM No.25294/2023 1. This is an application moved on behalf of the appellant/revenue seeking condonation of delay in re-filing the appeal. 1.1 According to the appellant/revenue, there is a delay of 300 days. 2. As the quantum appeals have already been admitted, the delay in re- filing is condoned. 3. The application is disposed of. 4. In case the respondent/assessee is aggrieved by the disposal of the application, he has liberty to approach the Court, albeit at the earliest. ITA 279/2023 5. This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2006-07. ITA 279/2023

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 13:32:03

6.

The challenge laid by the appellant/revenue is to the order dated 04.08.2021 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”]. The impugned order concerns penalty orders passed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”]. 7. The Tribunal via the impugned order has sustained the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 20.02.2018 whereby penalty orders dated 30.06.2015 were set aside. 7.1 The view taken by the Tribunal was based on the fact that the Tribunal has ruled in favour of the respondent/assessee, insofar as the quantum proceedings are concerned. 8. We are told by the counsel for the appellant/revenue, that insofar as the quantum proceedings are concerned, it has preferred an appeal to this Court, which is pending adjudication. 9. Accordingly, issue notice to the respondent/assessee via all modes, including e-mail. 10. List the appeal on 11.07.2023 before the concerned Registrar. 11. Once service is complete, the matter will be placed in regular category, along with ITA Nos. 740/2018 and 775/2018.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

MAY 16, 2023/ tr

Click here to check corrigendum, if any ITA 279/2023

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 13:32:03

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 →