IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘C’: NEW DELHI.

BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2919/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2015-16)

ITA No.2920/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2015-16)

ITA No.2921/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2016-17)

ITA No.2922/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2016-17)

ITA No.2923/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2017-18)

ITA No.2924/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2017-18)

ITA No.2925/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2018-19)

ITA No.2926/Del/2025 (Assessment Year : 2018-19)

Sanjeev Jai Narain Aeren, vs. Addl.CIT, Aerens Estate Mall Road, Central Range 4, Kishangarh Opp PKT-D-3, Delhi.

Church Road, Vasantkunj, New Delhi – 110 070.

(PAN : AAGPG8854J)

(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)

ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rajeshwar Prasad Painuly, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date of Order : 09.01.2026

O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1. The assessee has filed appeals against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 15.03.2025, for the Assessment Years 2015-16 and 2018-19 affirming the penalty orders passed u/s 271D and 271E of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. Since the issues are common and the appeals are connected, hence the same are heard together and being disposed off by this common order. We take up the assessee’s appeal being ITA No.2919/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2015-16 as lead case to adjudicate the issues under consideration.

3. Brief facts relating to the issues raised by the assessee arising out of penalty imposed u/s 271E of the Act brought to our notice by the ld. AR of the assessee are, the assessment order in which the proceedings were initiated u/s 269SS and 269T were initiated and completed on 29.12.2022. The relevant quantum appeals for AY 2015-16, 2017-18 and 2018-19 are pending before ld. CIT (A)-26 and no quantum appeal was pending before first appellate authority for AY 2016-17. The issue raised by the assessee in appeals before us are, the assessment was completed on

29.12.2022 and Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Range 04, Delhi passed the penalty order on 30.01.2024, therefore, the penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer is barred by limitation for imposition of the penalty. In this regard, he relied on the following case laws :-

(i) ITAT, Jaipur Bench in Jagdish Chandra Suwalka vs. JCIT –

IT Appeal No.376(JP) of 2022;

(ii) Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Pr. CIT vs. K Umesh Shett in IT Appeal No.165 of 2020, January 17,2025;

(iii) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT vs. Rishikesh Buildcon (P) Ltd. in IT Appeals Nos.577, 580 & 583 of 2019 November 17, 2022;

(iv) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Property Plus Realtors vs. UOI & Ors. – WP(C) 17371/2024, January 20, 2025.

4. He prayed that the various courts have held that penalty order should be completed after the expiry of financial year in which proceedings are completed for which action for imposition of penalty initiated or six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty is initiated, whichever period expires later. In this regard, he submitted that the Assessing Officer should have completed after completion of assessment proceedings after the expiry of financial year or from the date of initiation of proceedings to impose the penalty by him whereas in this case, penalty order was passed only on 30.01.2021 which is beyond period of limitation.

5. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted as under :-

“1. Introductory Submission • The Revenue respectfully submits that the penalty order passed by the Learned Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range-04, Delhi, under Section 27lE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 30.01.2024, is legally valid and within the prescribed limitation period.

• The assessee has sought to contend that the penalty order is barred by limitation under Section 275(1)(c) of the Act, relying upon various judicial pronounce