https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771052 The ITAT Chennai held that despite the assessee filing Form 68 beyond the prescribed 30-day period, immunity from penalty under Section 270A was granted. The AO had levied 50% penalty for under-reporting income after treating ex-gratia payments as salary instead of capital receipts. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. However, the ITAT found that the assessee satisfied the conditions under Section 270AA(3) for penalty immunity, even though the form was filed late. The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing immunity from the under-reporting penalty. en-us Thu, 15 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 May 2025 08:53:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771052 The ITAT Chennai held that despite the assessee filing Form 68 beyond the prescribed 30-day period, immunity from penalty under Section 270A was granted. The AO had levied 50% penalty for under-reporting income after treating ex-gratia payments as salary instead of capital receipts. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. However, the ITAT found that the assessee satisfied the conditions under Section 270AA(3) for penalty immunity, even though the form was filed late. The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing immunity from the under-reporting penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 15 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771052