IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, F: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.- 3083 & 3084/Del/2017 [Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10]

Additional commissioner of M/s PHI Seeds Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, (Now known as Corteva Special Range-7, Vs Agriscience Seeds Pvt. Ltd.)

Room No. -211, CR Building, 3rd Floor, 6-3-1099/1100, IP Estates, Babukhans Millenium New Delhi-110002, Centre, Raj Bhawan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082. PAN- AACCP3920F Revenue Assessee Revenue by Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR)

Assessee by Shri Sandeep Bansal, CA, Ms Deepika Gupta, CA Date of Hearing 16.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 31.10.2025 ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM:

These two appeals filed by the Revenue are against the respective orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 7, New Delhi, dated 23.02.2017 and 27.02.2017 arising from penalty orders both dated 27.03.2015 passed under section

271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The respective penalty proceedings for both the Assessment Years i.e. for A.Ys. 2008-09 and 2009-10 were initiated on the completion of the respective assessment orders u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 30.12.2011 and 15.02.2013. The respective penalty notices u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, dated 30.12.2011 and 15.02.2013 placed at page no. 20-22 of the Paper Book 4 are reproduced as under:

“

1.1 Since common issues are involved in both the appeals, they are disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

First of all, we take up ITA No. 3083/Del/2017, for A.Y. 2008-2009. 2. Brief facts of the case: In this case, the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed on 30.12.2011, in which, inter alia, the assessee’s claim for exemption under section 10(1) of the Act, on account of agricultural income of Rs. 55,07,79,154/-, was denied by the AO and the A.O. treated the same as business income (relevant paras are 4 and 31-35 of the assessment order). Further, an amount of Rs. 4,76,13,799/- was added on account of ‘Revaluation of closing stock’. (relevant paras are 37 and 38 of the assessment order). On account of these disallowances, the A.O. initiated penalty proceedings for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, and noted in para no. 36, 38 and 39 of his order as under:

“ 36. As assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of its income to the extent of Rs. 55,07,79,154/-, I am satisfied that it attracts penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Therefore, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are initiated in this regard.

38. The closing stock will, therefore, be increased by Rs.

14,29,95,311/-. However, it is seen that an addition of Rs.

9,53,81,512/- was made on similar grounds in the previous

assessment year i.e. 2006-07 and therefore, for the year under

consideration, the opening stock of the assessee will also be increased by this amount. As a net result profit of the assessee will be enhanced by an amount of Rs. 4,76,13,799/-.

39. As assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of its income and concealed particulars of its income to this extent. I am satisfied that it attracts penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Therefore, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are intimated in this regard.”

2.1 Further, in this case, the AO levied penalty amounting to Rs. 20,33,92,953/- for furnishing inaccurate particulars of its income. The para no. 13 of the penalty order levying the penalty is reproduced as under:

“ 13. It view of this it is clear that assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of its income in respect of the additions amounting to Rs.59,83,92,953/- (Rs.55,07,79,154/- + Rs. 4,76,13,799/-), and accordingly, it is found to be a fit case for imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, I therefore, impose a penal