IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 400/2017 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME 'TAX (CENTRAL)- 1 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Puneet Rai, Junior Standing Counsel with Mr Gaurav Khetrapal, Advocates versus M/S EMIRATES TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr Pranjal Srivastava, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER % 18.07.2017 1.The Revenue is in appeal against order dated 28th October, 2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA NO.476/Del./2014 for Assessment Year ( AY ) 2010-2011. 2.The question sought to be urged by Revenue is whether ITAT erred in law in confirming order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [ CIT(A)] deleting penalty imposed upon Respondent Assessee under Section 271AAA of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. CIT(A) in para 4.7 of order dated 4 th November, 2013 noted that no specific query had been put to Assessee by drawing his attention to ITA 400/2017 Page 1 of 2 Section 271 AAA of Act asking him to specify manner in which undisclosed income, surrendered during course of search, had been derived. CIT (A), therefore, relying on decisions of this Court held that jurisdictional requirement of Section 271AAA was not met. 4. above view has been concurred with by ITAT. 5. In facts and circumstances of case, Court is of view that concurrent decision of CIT(A) and ITAT represent plausible view which cannot be said to be perverse. 6. No substantial question of law arises for consideration. 7. appeal is accordingly dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J JULY 18, 2017 rd ITA 400/2017 Page 2 of 2 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-1 v. Emirates Technologies Pvt. Ltd