TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1267
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inafter referred to as "CIT(A)"] pertaining to penalty order passed u/s. 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] dated 15.03.2022 for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as "CIT(A)") erred in confirming the action of the Addl/Jt./Dy./ACIT/ITO, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "Assessing Officer"] in levying penalty of Rs. 43,13,340 under section 270A of the Act on the alleged ground that the Appellant has under reported its income in consequence of misreporting of income. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have disclosed for taxation. He observed that if the case was not selected for scrutiny the same would have escaped the assessment. There is no provision other than filing revised return of income, to revise the total income. The revised computation of income of the assessee did not absolve the assessee from the default. This failure of the assessee to record the receipt in the books of account was having a bearing on total income. Hence, according him, this case clearly fell within the ambit of section 270A(9) (e) of the Act. 4. In the subsequent appeal before the ld.CIT(A), it was contented by the assessee that the impugned sum was not disclosed as income for the relevant year on account of inadvertent mistake and there was no delibera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... its part. He further placed reliance on the coordinate bench decisions in the case of Sanjeev Kumar Manchand Rajpoot(2023) 157 taxmann.com 747(Pune) and IBS Software 158 taxmann.com 209(Ker) stating to be directly applicable to the facts of the case where also the impugned penalty pertained top section 270A of the Act. 6. The ld.AR has argued that the AO has invoked a wrong section in holding the assessee guilty in terms of section 270A(9)(e) of the Act which states failure to record any receipt in books of account having a bearing on total income which is not applicable to the facts of the case as the assessee has duly recorded the impugned sum in its books of account. The ld.AR on the other hand has mainly placed reliance on the decis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ile any further quantum appeal and accepted the addition made by the AO. However, this does not absolve the assessee from penalty liability if the income disclosed in the return was previously undisclosed or underreported. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mak Data P. Ltd. Vs. CIT [2013] 358 ITR 593 (SC) has observed that it is trite law that voluntary disclosure does not release the assessee from the mischief of penal proceedings and the law does not provide that when an assessee makes a voluntary disclosure of his concealed income, he had to be absolved from penalty. 7.2 We do not find any infirmity in the order of ld.CIT(A) in holding that the present case is covered by the provisions of section 270A(9)(a) instead of clause....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould substitute the order of the ITO by one of his own." 7.4 In the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and another reported in 187 ITR 688 the hon'ble Supreme Court noted with approval observation of the Court in the case of CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate(supra) to the effect that " The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, therefore, has plenary powers in disposing of appeal. The scope of his power is co-terminus with that of the Income Tax Officer. He can do what the Income Tax Officer can do and also direct him to do what he has failed to do." It was observed that there was no reason why the appellate authority cannot modify the assessment order on an additional ground even if not raised before the Income....