Bona fide disclosure and a debatable tax claim can defeat section 270A penalty when the statutory limb is not specified.

Penalty under section 270A was discussed in the context of an assessee who had fully disclosed the receipt, later sought exemption on a bona fide legal view, and then re-offered the income in response to section 148 notice with tax and interest paid. The text states that the issue on exemption of interest on enhanced compensation was debatable, the assessee acted on a genuine understanding of law, and the reassessment was not contested. It also notes that the penalty proceedings failed because the relevant limb of section 270A(2) was not specified. On the same facts, the conditions for immunity under section 270AA were described as otherwise satisfied, and non-filing of the prescribed application was treated as not defeating substantive entitlement.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under section 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable when the assessee had initially offered the receipt to tax, later claimed exemption on a bona fide legal view, and upon receiving notice under section 148 again offered the income to tax and paid the tax with interest, and whether the assessee was entitled to immunity under section 270AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 despite not filing the prescribed application.

Analysis: The assessee had disclosed the receipt in the original return, supported the revised claim by reliance on judicial authority, and, after the legal position changed, promptly included the amount in the return filed in response to notice under section 148. The record showed that the assessee had acted on a bona fide understanding of the law and that the issue regarding exemption of interest on enhanced compensation was debatable, with more than one possible view. The assessee had also paid the tax and interest and had not contested the reassessment. The penalty order and the assessment record did not specify the particular limb of section 270A(2) invoked for alleging under-reporting, and the absence of such specification was treated as fatal to the penalty proceedings. The Tribunal further noted that the conditions for immunity under section 270AA were otherwise satisfied, and the mere failure to file the application could not override the substantive entitlement on the facts.

Conclusion: The penalty under section 270A was held to be unsustainable and was deleted. The assessee succeeded on the merits and in substance obtained the benefit of immunity from penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for under-reporting of income cannot be sustained where the assessee's claim is bona fide, the facts are fully disclosed, the issue is debatable, and the authority fails to identify the specific statutory limb attracting section 270A.

---