TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 784
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that wrong deduction claimed earlier before assessing authority Tax was paid and adjust from TDS the appellant was aware of the fact that there is any form by filing which the penalty may be dropped so the penalty was never leviable in this case therefore the penalty u/s 270A may please be cancelled. 3. The appellant prays for justice and relief. 4. The appellant may please be permitted to raise any addition or alternative ground at or before the hearing." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and salaried employee. In this case, the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the IT Act was passed on 19.09.2019 determining total income at Rs. 9,29,620/-. During the year under consideration the assessee has claimed deduction of Rs. 5,00,000/- as donation u/s 80G of Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee himself accepted the deduction claimed u/s 80G was not genuine and wrong in accordance with the Act. Therefore, deduction claimed u/s 80G of the IT Act by the assessee was disallowed and Rs. 5,00,000/- and added back of total income of assessee. Therefore, penalty proceedings was initiated for misreporting of income as per the provision of section 270A of the I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty in the order of the AO and uphold the same. 4.1 In view of the facts and circumstances of the case the penalty imposed by the AO is liable to be confirmed. 5. I hold accordingly, the appeal is dismissed." 5. Feeling dissatisfied from the order of the ld. CIT(A), the ld. AR for the assessee has filed a detailed submissions which is reproduced hereinbelow:- "Respected Sir, With reference to above it is faithfully submitted that before I submit my submission I would like to narrate the brief facts of the case and here they are:- The assessee is an individual and salaried employee. The Assessee e-filed its Return of Income u/s 139(1) on 03-08-2017 vide acknowledgement No. 123233250030817 declaring total income at Rs. 948820/-. Later assessee has revised his return on 04.10.2017 vide acknowledgement No 230940210041017 declaring total income of Rs. 429620/- The case was selected for complete scrutiny through CASS for the following reason- 1. Large difference in total income shown in Annexure II of TDS Return of employer in form 24Q and that shown in ITR. 2. Taxable income shown in revised return is less than the taxable income shown in the original return and large refu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity from imposition of penalty under section 270A and initiation of proceedings under section 276C or section 276CC. subject to fulfilment of following conditions: - (a) the tax and interest payable as per the order of assessment or reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 147, as the case may be, has been paid within the period specified in such notice of demand; and (b) no appeal has been filed The application has to be made in form No. 68 within 30 days from the end of the month in which the order has been received by the Assessee. After providing opportunity to the Assessee, the AO shall pass the order either accepting the application or rejecting the same within one month from end of month in which application is made by the Assessee. The order so passed by the AO shall be final and is non appealable. The assessee fulfilled all the requirements of the above section for droping penalty u/s 270A of the IT Act but he was not aware to submit any letter to drop the penalty proceedings because that was the first year for this penalty so the AO should have waive it by his discretion power and should have waived it but he had to discharged his burden by imp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g officer to explicitly mention that penalty proceedings are being initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars or that for concealment of income makes the penalty order liable for cancellation even when it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the assessee had concealed income in the facts and circumstances of the case?" Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed SLP of the department in the above case of CIT Vs SSA'S Emerald Meadows [2016] 73 faxguru.in 248 (SC)/[2016] 242 Taxman 180 (SC). Courts have consistently held that at the time of initiation of penalty, charge should be clearly specified. Understanding of this basic concept by the assessing officers will go a long way in correct initiating of penalty and passing of sustainable penalty orders. Each and every word in the sentence for Initiation of penalty is crucial. Hence, the assessing officers must stop. think and ponder before recording satisfaction for initiation of penalty. As reproduced above, Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory held that notice under Section 274 of the Act should specifically state the grounds mentioned in Section 271(1)(C), i.e., wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R relied upon the reasoned order of the lower authorities, wherein the assessee has filed two different return of income and in the later one has filed wrong claim when the assessee wrong claim of donation and was called upon to justify the claim. Then the assessee has surrendered the excess claim. In light of the this fact, penalty levied by the lower authorities should be sustained. 8. We have heard the both parties and perused the materials available on record. It is not undisputed that the assessee is a salaried employee, the income from all the sources are duly reflected in the return of income filed by the assessee. The assessee on ad hoc basis filed a claim of deduction u/s 80G of the Act for an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- this claim was subjected to verification in scrutiny assessment and the assessee did not substantiate this claim of donation by filing the relevant proof of claim and in the assessment proceedings, the assessee has surrendered the said amount in assessment proceeding. Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of Section 270A of the Act, the Assessing Officer has levied penalty upon the assessee which is undisputed it is also not disputed that the fact further, w....