Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT

434 ITR 1High Court2021#82 most cited

What is Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT authority for?

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify the exact charge by not striking off the irrelevant limb (concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income). Such an omnibus or vague notice renders the penalty proceedings bad in law, and any penalty imposed on its basis is liable to be quashed.

672

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT · Section 271(1)(c) · Section 274 · defective penalty notice · non-striking off irrelevant limb · non-specification of charge · omnibus notice · vagueness · concealment of income · furnishing inaccurate particulars · penalty quashed

Sections most often in play

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 153ASection 250Section 147Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 270a(8)section 271(l)record datesection 271(l)(c)section 274section 270a(9)furnishing inaccurate particularsfurnishing inaccurate particulars of incomeconcealment of incomenon-application of mindpenalty proceedings initiatedpenalty u/s 271(1)(c)

Judgments citing Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT

Toshiba Water Solutions Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Range-18, Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5503/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.M/S Toshiba Water Solutions Vs Acit (P) Ltd. Range-18 4Th Floor, Tower De, Pioneer Delhi Urbank Square, Secdtor-62, Gurugram, Haryana Pan: Aaacu0043Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Manish Malik, Adv& Sh. Pankaj Jain, Itp Revenue By Sh. Amit Kumar Singh, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 06/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/08/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…direct the Registry to place these two Tax Appeals before the Division Bench concerned for further adjudication." 9. As could be seen from the above the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Full Bench at Goa) in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh v. ACIT [(2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom)] while dealing with the issue of non- strike off of the irrelevant part in the notice issued u/s.271(l)(c) of the 9 Toshiba Water Solutions (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT Act, held that assessee must be informed of the grounds of the penalty proceedings only through statutory notice and an omnibus notice suffers from the vice of vagueness. 10. Ratio o…

Arti Shailen Topiwala, Andheri West, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai, Bkc, Bandra East

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

ITA 4384/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Om Prakash Kant () Ita No. 4383 & 4384/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala Ito, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aacpt 3505 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 4383 & 4384/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 PAN NO. AACPT 3505 D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Rajesh Shah Revenue by : Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR Date of Hearing : 18/08/2025 : 26/08/2025 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These appeals by the assessee are…

Arti Shailen Topiwala, Andheri West, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai, Bkc, Bandra East

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statisti...

ITA 4383/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Om Prakash Kant () Ita No. 4383 & 4384/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala Ito, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 Pan No. Aacpt 3505 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 4383 & 4384/MUM/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Arti Shailen Topiwala ITO, Ward 34(1)(1), Mumbai B-701, Parimal Apartment, C.D. Income Tax Appellate Barfiwala Road, Andheri West, Vs. Tribunal, Mumbai- 400058 Mumbai- 400020 PAN NO. AACPT 3505 D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Rajesh Shah Revenue by : Mr. Surendra Mohan –SR. DR Date of Hearing : 18/08/2025 : 26/08/2025 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These appeals by the assessee are…

The Indian Express Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4337/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleι.Τ.Α. No. 4337/Mum/2025

For Appellant: Shri Sukhsagar Syal, A/RFor Respondent: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. D/R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142Section 22Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…the above it can be seen that the AO has not specified the limb under which he proposes to levy the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Anor. [2021] 434 ITR 1 (Bom[FB]), had the occasion to consider a similar challenge and interalia held as under:- “180. One course of action before us is curing a defect in the notice by referring to the assessment order, which may or may not contain reasons for the penalty proceedings. The other course of action is the prevention of defect in the notice-and that preventi…

Arun Dwivedi, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-9(2), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6123/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6123/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Arun Dwivedi, Acit, B-12, Vivekanand Puri, Vs. Circle-9(2), Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. Delhi. Pan No.Aalpd4998F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…sequently the penalty order is bad in law. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - 1. PCIT Vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal 153 taxmann.com 534 (Del); 2. PCIT Vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Company Limited 432 ITR 84 (Del); 3. Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh Vs. DCIT 434 ITR 1 (Bom.). 3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 4. Heard rival submissions. On perusal of the penalty notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) of the Act we observe that the notice was issued mechanically stating that assessee has concealed 2 the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of…

DCIT, CC-01, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee in AY 2006-07 is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2006-07 is dismissed

ITA 886/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…74 read with section 271(1)(c)of the Act is a defective one. He submitted that the charge has not been specified in the notice, hence referring to various decisions including that of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) & Pr. CIT vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 534 (Delhi), ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the penalty order is liable to be quashed. 9. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the above submissions. ITA Nos.884…

DCIT, CC-01, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee in AY 2006-07 is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2006-07 is dismissed

ITA 885/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…74 read with section 271(1)(c)of the Act is a defective one. He submitted that the charge has not been specified in the notice, hence referring to various decisions including that of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) & Pr. CIT vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 534 (Delhi), ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the penalty order is liable to be quashed. 9. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the above submissions. ITA Nos.884…

DCIT, CC-01, New Delhi vs. Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee in AY 2006-07 is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2006-07 is dismissed

ITA 884/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…74 read with section 271(1)(c)of the Act is a defective one. He submitted that the charge has not been specified in the notice, hence referring to various decisions including that of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) & Pr. CIT vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 534 (Delhi), ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the penalty order is liable to be quashed. 9. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the above submissions. ITA Nos.884…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee in AY 2006-07 is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue in AY 2006-07 is dismissed

ITA 6053/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…74 read with section 271(1)(c)of the Act is a defective one. He submitted that the charge has not been specified in the notice, hence referring to various decisions including that of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mr. Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh vs. ACIT 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Sahara India Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 432 ITR 84 (Del.) & Pr. CIT vs. Gopal Kumar Goyal (2023) 153 taxmann.com 534 (Delhi), ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the penalty order is liable to be quashed. 9. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the above submissions. ITA Nos.884…

M/S Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 310/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80

…come. Thus in the absence of any specific charge against the assessee in the penalty notice, consequent penalty imposed by AO is illegal and bad in law. Full Bench of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case ofMohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs. DCIT &Anr. (2021) 200 DTR 65/ 434 ITR 1 (Case laws compilation index PB 1-6) after considering all the decisions available on this dispute till the date of this order held that even if the assessment order clearly records satisfaction for imposing penalty on one or the other or both grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c), defect in the notice not striking off the irrelevant matter vitiat…

M/S Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Ltd., Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated

ITA 309/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80

…ncome. Thus in the absence of any specific charge against the assessee in the penalty notice, consequent penalty imposed by AO is illegal and bad in law. Full Bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case ofMohd. Farhan A. Shaikh Vs. DCIT &Anr. (2021) 200 DTR_65/434 ITR 1 (Case laws compilation index PB 1-6) after considering all the decisions available on this dispute till the date of this order held that even if the assessment order clearly records satisfaction for imposing penalty on one or the other or both grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c), defect in the notice not striking off the irrelevant matter vitiat…

DCIT Central Circle 7 (1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Panther Investrade Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the Cross appeals no

ITA 416/MUM/2025[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Akash Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan (Sr. DR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.416/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2003-04) Deputy Commissioner of v/s. Panther Investrade Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle – बनाम 121, 1st Floor, Radha Bhavan 7(1), 653, 6th Floor, Aaykar Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – Mumbai – 400 023, 400 020, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACP3259R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी प्रत्याक्षेपसं./C.O. No.50/MUM/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 416/MUM/2025) (A.Y. 2003-04) प्रत…

DCIT(Central Circle)-7(1), Mumbai vs. Panther Investrade Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the Cross appeals no

ITA 415/MUM/2025[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Akash Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan (Sr. DR)
Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.416/MUM/2025 (A.Y. 2003-04) Deputy Commissioner of v/s. Panther Investrade Limited, Income Tax, Central Circle – बनाम 121, 1st Floor, Radha Bhavan 7(1), 653, 6th Floor, Aaykar Nagindas Master Road, Fort, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – Mumbai – 400 023, 400 020, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACP3259R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी प्रत्याक्षेपसं./C.O. No.50/MUM/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 416/MUM/2025) (A.Y. 2003-04) प्रत…

Moraj Group Hospotalities Inc, Navi Mumbai vs. Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2047/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri. Pradip Kapasi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Moraj Group Hospitalities INC Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai Plot No. 57, Sector 17, Koperkhairne, Vs. Navi Mumbai – 400709 (PAN : AASFM1669B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri. Pradip Kapasi, CA Revenue : Shri. Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31.07.2025 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)- 53, Mumb…

Khushaal Chandrahas Thackersey, Mumbai vs. ACIT 17(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 859/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi,Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 54F

…ge in the notices issued u/s 274 of the Act, thus the same would vitiate the entire proceedings and entail the penalty order as nullity, in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Md. Farhan A Shaikh Vs. DCIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom.) (HC) (FB). 3 Khushaal Chandrahas Thackersey On the contrary, though the Ld. D.R. refuted the claim of the 4. Assessee and relied on the orders of the authorities below but not the contents of the notices, as pointed above. 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. As the issue/ground raised by the Assessee…

Azad Coach Private Limited, Rajasthan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6075/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Azad Coach Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, A. Amer Road, Jaipur, Circle-1(1), Jaipur -110054 New Delhi Rajasthan (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaeca3035A

For Appellant: Smt Ananya Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ally mentioning the offence committed by the assessee, would become fatal to the penalty proceedings ? This issue is no longer res integra in view of the Full Bench Decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mohd. Farhan A Shaikh vs DCIT reported in 434 ITR 1 (Bom)(FB) dated 11.3.2021. The relevant operative portion of the said judgement is reproduced hereunder:- Question No. 3: What is the effect of the Supreme Court's decision in Dilip N. Shroff Case (supra) on the issue of non-application of mind when the irrelevant portions of the printed notices are not struck off ? 187 In Dilip N. Shroff case (su…

M/S. Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-27(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9005/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalआअसं.9005/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2015-16) Unitech Reliable Projects P. Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8206-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 Assessee By : Shri D.C Garg, Chartered Accountant Department By : Ms. Monika Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 30/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri D.C Garg, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एफ”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं मनीष अ"वाल, लेखाकार सद" के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.9005/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2015-16) Unitech Reliable Projects P. Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN: AAACU-8206-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, CR Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 Assessee by : Shri D.C Garg, Chartered Accountant Department by : Ms. Monika Singh, C…

Unitech Hi-Tech Developers Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2913/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalआअसं.2909/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2011-12) Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8460-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2912/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Acacia Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-9453-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2913/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Hi-Tech Developers Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8064-B बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 (Ays 2011-12 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri D.C Garg, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 144CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एफ”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं मनीष अ"वाल, लेखाकार सद" के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.2909/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2011-12) Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN: AAACU-8460-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, CR Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2912/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Acacia Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Communit…

Unitech Acacia Projects P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2912/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalआअसं.2909/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2011-12) Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8460-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2912/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Acacia Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-9453-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2913/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Hi-Tech Developers Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8064-B बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 (Ays 2011-12 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri D.C Garg, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 144CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एफ”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं मनीष अ"वाल, लेखाकार सद" के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.2909/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2011-12) Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN: AAACU-8460-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, CR Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2912/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Acacia Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Communit…

Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-27(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2909/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manish Agarwalआअसं.2909/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2011-12) Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8460-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2912/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Acacia Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-9453-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2913/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Hi-Tech Developers Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaacu-8064-B बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, Cr Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 (Ays 2011-12 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri D.C Garg, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 144CSection 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “एफ”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं मनीष अ"वाल, लेखाकार सद" के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.2909/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2011-12) Unitech Hospitality Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Community Centre, Saket, Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN: AAACU-8460-H बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 27(1), R.No. 193, CR Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent New Delhi 110002 आअसं.2912/िद"ी/2019(िन.व. 2013-14) Unitech Acacia Services Ltd., Basement, 6, Communit…