The Appellate Tribunal considered the levy of penalty u/s 270A. ...

Penalty Overturned: Tribunal Finds No Evidence of Income Misreporting, Deletes Penalty for Estimated Expense Disallowance.

June 11, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

The Appellate Tribunal considered the levy of penalty u/s 270A. The Assessing Officer (AO) imposed the penalty u/s 270A(9)(a) for misrepresentation of facts and misreporting of income. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee had provided evidence of expenses through books, vouchers, and banking channels. The CIT(A) agreed that there was no failure to claim expenditure. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not provide fresh notice to the assessee after changing the basis for penalty. The disallowance of expenditure on an estimate basis was not sufficient for penalty u/s 270A(9)(a) or (c). The authorities did not independently examine the matter for penalty. The Tribunal held that disallowance alone cannot justify the penalty without proof of misrepresentation or suppression of facts. As there was no evidence of misrepresentation, the penalty was deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The Appellate Tribunal considered the levy of penalty u/s 270A. ...

Penalty Overturned: Tribunal Finds No Evidence of Income Misreporting, Deletes Penalty for Estimated Expense Disallowance.

June 11, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Penalty proceedings u/s 270A - Applicable rate of penalty - The Appellate Tribunal noted that while the penalty notice cited under-reporting of income, the AO imposed...

Penalty u/s 270A - allegation of misreporting as per section 270A(9) - Penalty @200% in respect of excess claim of depreciation - The tribunal found that the...

ITAT found the penalty proceedings under section 270A invalid due to procedural deficiencies. The AO failed to specifically identify the precise misreporting clause and...

Penalty imposed u/s 270A(9) for underreporting and misreporting of income was challenged due to non-specification of clear charge. The Tribunal held that underreporting...

ITAT adjudicated a tax penalty case involving deemed rental income for a property. The tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention, noting that a prior tribunal...

The Appellate Tribunal considered two issues: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and u/s 270A. For the first, the Tribunal found the penalty notice defective as it did not specify...

ITAT adjudicated a tax penalty case involving multiple PAN registrations. The assessee demonstrated inadvertent income reporting across different PAN statuses (from...

Penalty u/s 270A and 271AAB - Defective notice u/s 274 - under reporting of income - search and seizure operation - The Tribunal found that the penalty notices under...

Penalty u/s. 270A - Under-reporting of income / Mis-reporting - Interest income from income tax refunds - After reviewing the submissions and case materials, the...

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the assessing officer against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, holding that no substantial question of law...

ITAT held that no specific charge was framed against the assessee in the show-cause notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 270A for misreporting of income. While the...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The Appellate Tribunal observed that the appellant, during reassessment proceedings, had filed their return of income but failed to provide...

ITAT set aside penalty under s271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act following deletion of quantum addition in earlier proceedings. The underlying dispute involved classification...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the issue of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) concerning the correct classification of income. The Assessing Officer treated the income as 'income...

ITAT held that the income estimation by AO did not warrant penalty under section 270A(1) as the books of accounts were not rejected. The estimation was saved by...

Quick Updates: