https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470278 Penalty for under-reporting was not leviable where the taxpayer's explanation was bona fide, supported by full disclosure of material facts, and accepted as genuine under section 270A(6). Substantial self-assessment tax had been paid before reopening, capital-gains income was fully disclosed in response to notice, and the returned income was accepted without adjustment. Ambiguity over taxability of jointly held property under a joint-development arrangement also supported the absence of intent to under-report. The disclosed income therefore fell within the statutory exclusion, requiring deletion of the penalty. en-us Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jul 2026 19:10:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470278 Penalty for under-reporting was not leviable where the taxpayer's explanation was bona fide, supported by full disclosure of material facts, and accepted as genuine under section 270A(6). Substantial self-assessment tax had been paid before reopening, capital-gains income was fully disclosed in response to notice, and the returned income was accepted without adjustment. Ambiguity over taxability of jointly held property under a joint-development arrangement also supported the absence of intent to under-report. The disclosed income therefore fell within the statutory exclusion, requiring deletion of the penalty. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470278