2023 (7) TMI 1390

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1961 for the A.Y. 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively. The Assessee for A.Y. 2017- 18 has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. The learned CIT is not justified in raising penalty u/s 270A of Rs. 1,57,400/- on the ground that the assesses has furnish inaccurate particulars of Income without appreciating that the said levy of penalty was not justified in law. 2. The learned CIT failed to appreciate that before the CIT, the assesses had duly explained that reporting of income in his case was attributable to wrong action of tax consultant and all the material facts relating thereto along with substantiating evidences in form of complaint filed against Tax Consultant before Economic Wing of Police Department etc. were also f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by the assesses was not justified in view of provisions of the said Act. 3. The learned CIT ought to have appreciated that the bona fides of the explanation offered by assesses were established from the fact that the assesses, being salaried employee from technical background, was totally dependent upon the tax consultant for filing income tax return and no such incorrect claim was ever made by the assesses either in past years or in subsequent years and therefore, the levy of penalty u/s 270A was not justified in view of the explanation offered by the assesses." Brief facts of the case (ITA No.361/PUN/2023) : 3. In this case, assessee is an employee in a company. Assessee filed original Return for A.Y. 2017-18 electronica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is mentioned that assessee has under reported his income which in consequence of mis-reporting. Accordingly, AO levied penalty of 200%. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) upheld the penalty order. Submission of ld.AR: 5. The ld.AR stated that AO has failed to specify the limbs of section 270A(9) of the Act. The ld.AR explained that in the assessment order there is no addition and AO had accepted the Return of Income shown in the Return filed in response to notice under section 148. Once the AO has accepted the Return of Income, there cannot be any under reporting or mis-reporting. The ld.AR relied on the order of this Co-ordinate Bench in the case Kishor Digambar Patil Vs. ITO....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... at relevant provisions of Section 270(8) &(9) of the Act which reads as under: - "Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income. 270A. (1) ........................ (8) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (6) or sub section (7), where under-reported income is in consequence of any misreporting thereof by any person, the penalty referred to in subsection (1) shall be equal to two hundred per cent of the amount of tax payable on under-reported income. (9) The cases of misreporting of income referred to in sub-section (8) shall be the following, namely:- (a) misrepresentation or suppression of facts; (b) failure to record investments in the books of account; ....