9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case to the extent prejudicial to the interests of the appellant and is opposed to the principles of equity, natural justice and fair play. 2. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the penalty order of the Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction. 3. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the levy of penalty for under reporting of income under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 9,07,270-. 4. For that the provisions of section 270A are not invocable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. For that the Assessing Officer erred in not specifying the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with M/s.Pfizer Health Care India Private Limited and filed his return of income on 14.08.2020 for the A.Y. 2020-21 by admitting a taxable income of Rs. 8,65,750/-. 5. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices were issued to assessee and requested to furnish the details as per the notice. Assessee filed the details as and when called for. The assessee has claimed an amount of Rs. 53,05,934/- as exempt income which he received from his employer on early termination of service. The assessee had contended that the said sum, being received as ex-gratia and not forming part of the terms of the employment contract, is in the nature of a capital receipt and hence not liable to tax. 6. The AO passed an order u/s. 143(3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her held no further interference was called for. 9. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. 10. The ld.AR, assailing the action of Ld.CIT(A), submitted that Ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the penalty levied by the AO u/s. 270A of the Act for under reporting its income, by levying 50% of total tax. The ld.AR advanced the argument by stating that the issue of amount received as Ex-gratia was not taxable being capital in nature has been decided in favour of the assessee at Hon'ble Pune Tribunal in Godavari Vijay Kulkarni L/H of Late Vijay Shrinivasrao Kulkarni V ITO in ITA No.1159/Pun/2023 - Pune Trib and held that the Ex-Gratia amount received by the assessee being capital in na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2022 amounting to Rs. 21,11,380/- which is within the period/given time in the assessment order and demand notice and thus has fulfilled the conditions prescribed u/s. 270AA of the Act for claiming immunity from imposition of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act and did not file an appeal against the assessment order dated 05.09.2022. Thus, the assessee has fulfilled the conditions of clause (a) & clause (b) of sub- section 1 of section 270AA of the Act. We find that the show cause notice dated 05.09.2022 was initiated u/s. 274 read with section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for under reported income which is in consequence of misreporting of income, the assessee was not eligible to claim the immunity u/s. 270AA of the Act and hence did not file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
