TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 673
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. The Assessing Officer erred in imposed penalty of Rs. 8,48,378/- @ 200% u/s 270A of Income Tax Act 1956. The CIT (A) appeal partly allowed and erred in imposed penalty of Rs. 2,12,095/-.@50% for under reporting u/s 270A of the Act. 2. The Appellant contended that levy of penalty under section 270A of the Act is not mandatory as the section gives the AO discretion to levy or not levy penalty, given that the word used in the section is 'may' and not 'shall'. A bare reading of the section 270A reveals that the AO 'may' direct the assessee to pay penalty in addition to tax on the under-reported income. According to the Ld. AR therefore its gives....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... specifically provides the cases where income will not be considered to be under reported, the taxpayer submitted that it is not necessary that all the additions made in the assessment order culminate into charging of penalty under section 270A of the Act. 5. The Appellant state that the AO had passed the order levying penalty at the rate of 200% without even specifically bringing out which of the instances as specified in section 270(9) of the Act were triggered, which further corroborated the fact that the AO had passed the impugned penalty order in an arbitrary and whimsical manner and with a pre-determined mindset. 6. The imposition of penalty under section 270A(9) of the Income Tax Act without specifying the limb with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....servations: "The income has been reduced on account of salary income revised to Rs. 54,78,950/- in revised return as against Rs. 65,30,005/- offered in original income. The appellant has also revised income from house property from Rs. (-)73,845/- to Rs. (-)1,77,000/- on account of interest payable on borrowed capital. The gross total income reduced by Rs. 11,54,2107/- due to these two reasons. The AO has assessed the income as per original return. There is no detection of any concealed or misreporting from the appellant found by AO. This is a case of purely under reporting of income by the appellant which is liable for penalty u/s 270A(7) at the rate of 50% of under reporting of income. Misreporting clause will be attracted only w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and revised return of income filed by the assessee, for the impugned assessment year. The case of the assessee is that he could not appear before the Assessing Officer since there was non-receipt of notices by the assessee. However, we also note that assessee had filed revised return of income much prior to initiation of assessment proceedings against the assessee. It is not the case of the Department that the assessee had revised the return of income after the issuance of notices initiating the assessment proceedings. We note that first notice of hearing under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on the assessee on 29.06.2021, whereas the assessee had filed revised return on 20.12.2020, much prior to issuance of first notice of hearing, ....