TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 35
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder of the NFAC, Delhi dated 24.03.2023 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1051236160(1) for the above mentioned Assessment Year is contrary to law, fact and in circumstances of the case. 2. The NFAC, Delhi erred in confirming the levy of penalty u/s 270A of the Act to the tune of Rs. 9,69,180/- on the presumption of misreporting of income of Rs. 4,84,590/- as per the provisions of section 270A(8) of the Act without assigning proper reasons and justification. 3. The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate the levy of penalty u/s 270A of the Act for presumed mis-reporting of income was wholly unjustified and ought to have appreciated that the inadvertent mistake of treating the Self-occupied Property as Let out Property....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on facts and in law. 7. The NFAC, Delhi ought to have appreciated that in any event. the levy of penalty u/s 270A of the Act on various facets was wrong, erroneous, incorrect, invalid, unjustified and not sustainable both on facts and in law. 8. The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that the impugned order was passed out of time, invalid, passed without jurisdiction and not sustainable both on facts and in law. 9. The NFAC, Delhi failed to appreciate that procedure for conducting Faceless Appeal Regime was not followed and ought to have appreciated that in the light of the procedural irregularities committed, the impugned order under consideration accordingly should be reckoned as bad in law. 10. The NFAC....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied. In response, the assessee submitted that while filing return of income for assessment year 2018-19, he has computed excessive loss under the head 'income from house property' and carried forward losses to subsequent years. However, while filing return of income for assessment year 2019-20 and the same was filed on 28.07.2020, he has not taken set off of brought forward losses against house property income. Therefore, showing excess loss by mistaken of facts cannot be considered as under-reporting of income. The Assessing Officer, however, was not satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee and according to the Assessing Officer, as per provisions of section 270A(2) of the Act, if the income assessed has effect of reducing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned counsel for the assessee referring to provisions of section 270A(8) of the Act submitted that the Assessing Officer failed to make out a case of levying 200% penalty, which is evident from fact that parameters required u/s. 270A(8) of the Act does not applicable to the facts of the present case. 7. The learned DR Shri P.Sajit Kumar, supporting order of the learned CIT(A), submitted that it is a clear case of misreporting or suppression of facts, as per section 270A(9) of the Act, which is clear from the facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has computed excessive loss under the head 'income from house property' and carry forward loss to subsequent assessment years. The arguments of the assessee that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t year 2019-20, which is evident from return of income filed for assessment year 2019- 20 on 28.07.2020. In fact, the Assessing Officer never disputed this fact, but only reason for the Assessing Officer to levy penalty u/s. 270A(8) of the Act is the assessee has misreported or suppressed facts with regard to income from house property which resulted in computation of excessive loss under the head 'income from house property'. According to the Assessing Officer, whether the assessee has claimed set off of unabsorbed losses in next year or not claimed is also does not matter. 9. In our considered view, the Assessing Officer has misunderstood the provisions of section 270A(9), while interpreting levy of penalty for under reporting of incom....