https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753548 Delhi HC held that immunity under Section 270AA could not be refused unless the proposed penalty was specifically founded on misreporting under Section 270A(9). Because the assessment orders did not record any clear finding of misreporting and the assessee had satisfied the payment and no-appeal conditions, rejection of immunity was unsustainable and was set aside. The Court also held that penalty notices under Section 270A must clearly identify whether the charge is under-reporting or misreporting; ambiguous notices that failed to specify the exact statutory limb were invalid. The impugned rejection orders and penalty notices were quashed, with consequential relief to the assessee. en-us Fri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Jun 2024 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753548 Delhi HC held that immunity under Section 270AA could not be refused unless the proposed penalty was specifically founded on misreporting under Section 270A(9). Because the assessment orders did not record any clear finding of misreporting and the assessee had satisfied the payment and no-appeal conditions, rejection of immunity was unsustainable and was set aside. The Court also held that penalty notices under Section 270A must clearly identify whether the charge is under-reporting or misreporting; ambiguous notices that failed to specify the exact statutory limb were invalid. The impugned rejection orders and penalty notices were quashed, with consequential relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753548