<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (1) TMI 868 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764804</link>
    <description>ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 270A for under-reporting of income due to mis-reporting was not sustainable. The assessee failed to add back service tax liability and late payment of employees&#039; PF contribution in the tax return. However, both amounts were disclosed in the audit report, which formed the basis for disallowance by the AO. Following Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP and Price Waterhouse Coopers precedents, the tribunal found this did not constitute mis-reporting since information was already available in audit reports. The penalty proceedings also lacked clarity on which limb of section 270A applied. Assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2025 08:47:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=789937" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 868 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764804</link>
      <description>ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 270A for under-reporting of income due to mis-reporting was not sustainable. The assessee failed to add back service tax liability and late payment of employees&#039; PF contribution in the tax return. However, both amounts were disclosed in the audit report, which formed the basis for disallowance by the AO. Following Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP and Price Waterhouse Coopers precedents, the tribunal found this did not constitute mis-reporting since information was already available in audit reports. The penalty proceedings also lacked clarity on which limb of section 270A applied. Assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764804</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>