2025 (10) TMI 1233

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. In both the appeals the assessee challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC confirming the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the Assessing Officer. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. A perusal of the order sheet entries shows that these cases were first fixed on 12.02.2025 and since no one appearing on behalf of the assessee, these cases were getting adjourned from time to time and finally when the name of the assessee was called today, neither anybody appeared nor there was any application for adjournment. Under these circumstances, we deem it prope....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty should not be made u/s 270A of the Act. The explanation given by the assessee was rejected by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee has claimed excess deduction and had the department not detected the under-reporting income in this particular case, then the assessee might not have submitted his revised income and enjoyed the benefit of relevant under-reporting income. Therefore, due to under-reporting in consequence of mis-reporting his income within the meaning of section 270A(1) r.w.s. 270A(8) and 270A(10), the Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs. 1,32,086/- being 200% of the amount of tax payable on under-reported income. 5. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. 6. Aggriev....