TANEJA CONSTRUCTION UDYOG LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 27, NEW DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the assessment proceedings were initiated based on search documents, and the AO had noted concealment of income. The grounds raised by the assessee regarding the reason for issuing the notice under Section 271(1)(c) had no substance.
What were the facts?
The assessee's return of income was filed at nil. During assessment, Rs.4,60,300 was added as expenditure from undisclosed sources. This addition was confirmed by the FAA, leading to a penalty for concealment of income.
What were the issues?
Whether the grounds raised by the assessee regarding the issuance of notice under Section 271(1)(c) had any substance, given the findings of concealment of income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
Assessment Year : 2009-10 Taneja Construction Udyog Ltd., Vs. DCIT, 34/5, East Patel Nagar, Central Circle-27, New Delhi – 110 008. New Delhi. PAN: AAACT0381L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Amit Jain, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.11.2025 ORDER
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 01.08.2018 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No.05/2017-18/CIT(A)-29 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 30.03.2017 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the DCIT, Central Circle-27, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).
None appeared for the assessee at the time of hearing and the record shows that the assessee has been served notices repeatedly. Earlier, this appeal was dismissed on 01.04.2019 for non-appearance of the assessee and, subsequently, the order was recalled on 23.05.2025. Even at that time actually none appeared for the assessee. There is no justification to issue further notices.
On hearing the ld. DR and perusing the record, we find that the assessee’s return of income was filed at nil, but, during the assessment Rs.4,60,300/- was added as unaccounted expenditure met from undisclosed sources which was confirmed by the ld. FAA and the concealment of this income has led to levy of this penalty. We find that the assessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of documents found in search and in the assessment proceedings itself the AO had mentioned that there is a concealment of true particulars of income leading to levy of penalty. Thus, the grounds raised in the present appeal that there is no reason given for issuance of notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has no substance.
The grounds have no substance. The appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
The appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.11.2025.
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 →- M/S.Shree Construction, Khordha vs. The Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Pramod Kumar Behera vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Santosh Kumar Pradhan (Late Biswabhar Pradhan) vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise And Customs, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Mrs. Sharma Glass And Plywoods vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- Sri Mohanraj vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026