TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 807
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ued and served on the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to explain as to why income was reduced in revised return. The AO observed that the total taxable income shown in Annexure II of TDS return of employer in Form 24Q was more than the revised return of income filed by the assessee. Accordingly, the AO made an addition of Rs. 12,61,420/- being difference between the total income as per original return of income and revised return. Simultaneously, the AO also initiated penalty u/s 270A of the Act for under-statement of income in consequence of mis-reporting and thereof. During penalty proceedings, AO was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the assessee and hence levied penalty u/s 270A @ 200% of Rs. 12,61,420/-. Accordingly, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and raised several grounds of appeal and also submitted detailed submissions in reference to grounds of appeal before him as under :- "Reply of Ground No.1. Conditions for grant of immunity An application for immunity can be made subject to satisfaction of both the undermentioned conditions - the tax and interest, as demanded, as per the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tax Act, 1961 and not considered the same. I would like to give reference to the case of the Honorable Supreme Court of India which was given order by him on 25 September 2023 which is as follows: The Supreme Court on 25.09.2023, in a Judgment on issue of immunity from penalty and prosecution by the Settlement Commission, delivered has held that: the assessee ought to have a) made full and true disclosure before the Commission b) Co-operated with the Commission in the proceedings before it. ( para 6) It further held that "having regard to the legislative intent, frequent interference with the orders or proceedings of the Settlement Commission should be avoided. There are limited grounds on which an order or proceeding of the Settlement Commission can be judicially reviewed. The High Court should not scrutinise an order or proceeding of Settlement Commission as an appellate court [t upheld the order of the Settlement Commission granting immunity from penalty and prosecution. Copy of judgment is also attached as MIs KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Vs CIT, Bangluru civil appeal n NO.9720 OF 2014. The another ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itrary". The High Court directs the respondent to grant immunity under Section 270M of the Act to the Petitioner. i. The Income is show Under Reported as per Ld AO passed Assessment order dated 1610912022. After the order was passed by the Income Tax Officer, the Assessee deposited his tax in full and also submitted his Form 68, Immunity Form 68 within time on 08/10/2022, which fulfills all the conditions of Income Tax as per the rules, which a Assessee is entitled for gets under this law for immunity. ii. In response to the showcase notice also a copy of Form 68 was filed with reply to the Income Tax Officer in reply dated 8.10.2022, a copy is attached. As per the provisions of the Income Tax Act u/s 270M for immunity, the Assessee has fulfilled all the four conditions according to the rules, which are as follows- The Assessee had fulfilled all the four conditions as per law. The Assessee had filled form 68 online on dated 08/10/2022. 1. The Assessee have not suppressed any hidden anything 2. The assessment income is under reporting 3. The Assessment order comes under 147/143(3). 4. The Assessee have filled form 68 for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter considering the submissions of the assessee, ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee by observing as under :- "7. I have considered the order of the AO and the submission made by the appellant during appellate proceedings. It is seen from the assessment order that the appellant had originally filed return of income with total income of Rs. 43,88,120/-. Subsequently, the appellant filed a revised return on 30.03.2021 with total income of Rs. 31,26,700/-. The appellant during the course of the assessment proceedings before the AO, failed to explain as to why income was reduced in the revised return. The AO also noticed that the income of the appellant in the revised return was less than total taxable income shown in annexure-II of TDS return of employer in Form 24Q for which no explanation could be offered by the appellant. Hence, the AO made addition of Rs. 12,61,420/- being difference between the total income as per original return of income and the revised return. The AO also initiated penalty u/s 270A for under statement of income in consequence of mis-reporting thereof. During the penalty proceedings, the AO was not satisfied with the explanation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es hence is unsustainable. 2. That the impugned Penalty order proceeding by the Ld AO for under reporting of Income with reference to any clause of section of 270A was bad in Law, wrong, having no base and against the circumstance of the case. 3. That on facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the assessing officer had erred in assessing the Penalty of the appellant the amount received under voluntary retirement scheme has been a total composite package under a scheme of voluntary separation, While the demand for the Assessment order was zero. The assessee had filed a application for immunity under Section 270M of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter 'the Act) was not consider and passed the impugned penalty order of Rs 1112912.00 and demand issued of Rs. 11,12,912/- please be deleted. 4. The Submission is submitted by Assesses during Penalty Assessment on dated 08/10/2022 for a application for immunity under Section 270AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 and riot considered the same While the demand for the Assessment order was zero and Not considered the Submission of Assessee by Ld CIT(A) and as The Submission is not also considered by Ld AO. Therefore, ....