Penalty under section 270A could not be sustained where the...

Penalty under section 270A could not be sustained where the assessee's revised-return claim rested on a bona fide, legally plausible POEM-based position under a then-nascent legal framework, and all material facts were disclosed. Rejection of the claim in assessment did not, by itself, establish misreporting, deliberate suppression, or contumacious conduct, so the case fell outside section 270A(9)(a). The Tribunal also held that assessment and penalty proceedings are separate and independent, and failure to appeal the quantum addition did not amount to acceptance of wrongdoing or justify penalty. The penalties were quashed and both appeals allowed.