The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and held that the ...

Tribunal Overturns Penalty for Under-Reported Income; Error Deemed Inadvertent, Aligning with Supreme Court Precedent.

December 9, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and held that the penalty u/s 270A for under-reporting of income was not justified. The assessee had offered an additional amount under the head 'income from other sources' in the return filed in response to a notice u/s 148. However, the Tribunal observed that the assessee did not fall under any of the circumstances specified in Section 270A(2) for considering income as under-reported. The non-disclosure of interest on income tax refunds was an inadvertent and bona fide error, which does not attract penalty as per the Supreme Court's decision in Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. case. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in sustaining the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 270A.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and held that the ...

Tribunal Overturns Penalty for Under-Reported Income; Error Deemed Inadvertent, Aligning with Supreme Court Precedent.

December 9, 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...

ITAT adjudicated a taxation dispute concerning penalty levy under section 270A. The tribunal examined whether disallowed expenses constituted underreported income. Key...

Difference between assessed income and returned income arose due to inadvertent error in taking opening written down value (WDV) at book value instead of WDV under...

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...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - loss on sale of machinery - The Assessee contested the penalty, arguing that the omission of adding the loss on the sale of machinery to the...

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case where disallowance of Gratuity u/s 43B was made due to a discrepancy in classification in the Income Tax Return and tax audit...

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

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - bogus claim u/s 80C - The Tribunal found that there was a discrepancy in the application of penalties by the lower authorities. - While the...

Accrual of income in India - taxability of the “software” supplied to Indian affiliates - The Tribunal's decision effectively overturns the AO's and DRP's stance,...

Seeking amendment of shipping bills - inadvertent error in the Shipping bills - seeking to credit ROSCTL benefit amounts to the petitioner’s Customs E-Scrip Ledger - The...

Levy of Penalty u/s 129(3) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - Errors in e-way bills - The Court emphasized that minor typographical errors in e-way bills,...

ITAT adjudicated a case involving penalty under Section 43 of the Black Money Act for non-reporting of foreign assets in Schedule FA. Despite technical non-disclosure,...

Section 12(1)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 requires reporting entities to furnish information about transactions referred to in Section 12(1)(a) to...

Penalty u/s 270A - “under reporting” of the income - The assessee has not under reported any income. The addition has arisen on account of change in head of income. We...

Quick Updates: