TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 218
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the ld. CIT(A), NFAC Delhi erred in confirming the penalty levied by the ld. A.O. to the tune of Rs. 96,404/- without considering the facts of the case favorably." 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an HUF, filed its return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 27/08/2018 declaring total income of Rs. 4,28,490/-. In the computation of total income, the assessee has shown 'business income' of Rs. 2,43,414, income from 'house property' of Rs. 2,19,612/-, income from 'other sources' of Rs. 43,457/-. The return of income was selected for scrutiny. During the assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that in the return of income, the assessee claimed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from house property' but shown in the 'income of other sources'. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assesse has manipulated the facts. Further no statutory deduction @ 30% on account of repairs etc. as available under Section 24(a) is claimed in computation of income of other co-owners. Further in AS-26 and ITS details, the rental payment has been recorded under PAN: AALHR 4363 J in the name of Shri Rajesh C. Dalal (HUF). Nowhere there was mention of any other shareholder or division of such income. Further the rent agreement in between the assessee Rajesh C. Dalal (HUF) and tenants namely Ms. R.K. Gujarati and Shri Bhagwanbhai G. Gujarati. Such rent agreement substantiate that rental income relates to assessee and not for any o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessment order dated 27.01.2021 passed under section 143(3) of Act. The assessee also submitted that they have also filed Form-68 for granting immunity under section 270AA. 4. The assessing officer after considering the submissions of the assessee recorded that he sent letter to the jurisdictional assessing officer on 12.05.2021 & 20.01.2022 for seeking the status of outcome of immunity application including rejection or acceptance of such application. The assessing officer recorded that no response was received from jurisdictional assessing officer on the immunity application of assessee under section 270AA. The assessing officer further recorded that a final show cause notice dated 24.02.2022 was issued to the assessee to know the st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fore assessing officer. The assessing officer neither rejected the application of assessee under section 270AA nor intimated about the outcome of such application. The penalty was levied by other assessing officer, without taking the fact in the consideration that the application of assessee was not rejected thus, the action of levying penalty is not justified. The assessee fulfilled all the conditions of section 270AA of the Act. Therefore, the penalty is not justified unless the plea of seeking for immunity is not rejected. 6. In the alternative plea, the ld AR for the assessee submits that there was no misreporting of the income. The assessee during assessment filed revised computation of income and the same was accepted by assessing of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....if the application of assessee under section 270AA is rejected or immunity is granted. However, facts remained the same that the application of assessee was not rejected as it was neither communicated to the assessee or to the assessing officer who was seized with the penalty proceedings under section 270A. Though, the assessing officer levied penalty under section 270A by taking view that immunity cannot be availed as the penalty was initiated under section 270A(9). The ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of assessing officer by taking view that application for seeking immunity was filed belatedly and no provision under which the assessing officer could condoned the delay. 9. We find that the finding of assessing officer and ld CIT(A) are on d....