https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781919 ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the penalty imposed u/s 270A. It held that the AO, while invoking penalty u/s 270A(1) read with s. 270A(8), must clearly specify the exact limb of s. 270A(9)(a)-(g) under which income is treated as misreported. Such specification must be explicit in the penalty order or unambiguously discernible from its reading; otherwise, the penalty is unsustainable. In this case, the AO failed to indicate the precise limb, and the record showed the assessee had substantiated its purchase expense claim with documents. The order of CIT(A) was set aside. en-us Fri, 10 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Nov 2025 07:36:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781919 ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal and deleted the penalty imposed u/s 270A. It held that the AO, while invoking penalty u/s 270A(1) read with s. 270A(8), must clearly specify the exact limb of s. 270A(9)(a)-(g) under which income is treated as misreported. Such specification must be explicit in the penalty order or unambiguously discernible from its reading; otherwise, the penalty is unsustainable. In this case, the AO failed to indicate the precise limb, and the record showed the assessee had substantiated its purchase expense claim with documents. The order of CIT(A) was set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781919