UNITECH REALITY PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-27(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4408/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 February 2026AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition on account of exchange of land was not justified as the assessee had not received any monetary consideration. However, the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) was quashed due to a defective show-cause notice.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a real estate developer, exchanged land without disclosing any sale value in its books. The Assessing Officer added the difference between the circle rate and the book value of the exchanged land to the assessee's income. The CIT(A) upheld this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the difference between the circle rate and the book value of exchanged land is taxable as business income, and whether a defective penalty show-cause notice vitiates the penalty proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c),Section 250,Section 50C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.02.2026Pronounced: 12.02.2026

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These twin assessees, namely, ‘M/s. Unitech Reality Pvt. Ltd.’ and ‘M/s. Unitech Residential Resorts Ltd.’ have filed their as many

ITA Nos.4408 & 4409/Del/2019

appeals ITA Nos.4408 & 4409/Del/2019 for assessment years 2013-14 and 2010-11, against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s separate orders dated 29.03.2019 and 26.03.2019 passed in case nos. 43/18-19/1071 and 10159/2018-19, involving proceedings under sections 143(3) and 271(1)(c) of the

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →