TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1314
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."], arising out of the penalty order passed under section 270A of the Act dated 22.09.2022 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.The penalty proceedings emanate from the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 read with section 144 and section 144B of the Act dated 29.03.2022. Facts of the Case 2. The assessee is an individual. For the year under consideration, the case of the assessee was reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 dated 23.03.2021 on the basis of information available in the Individual Transaction Statement (ITS) under the AIMS module. 3. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had not filed the return of income for the relevant assessment year. As per the information available ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 270A(2) and was liable for penalty. 5. Before the Learned CIT(A), the assessee submitted that he is a salaried individual and income was already subjected to TDS by employer. He further submitted that return of income was filed in response to notice under section 148, declaring total income of approximately Rs. 54,69,890/- and taxes were duly discharged through TDS and self-assessment tax and due to lack of awareness and technical difficulties, the he could not properly respond to notices issued during assessment and penalty proceedings. The assessee also submitted that the department already had access to salary income through TDS records and thus there was no concealment or under-reporting. 6. The CIT(A) held that the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der is bad in law inasmuch as the Learned CIT(A) dismissed the penalty appeal despite being specifically informed during appellate proceedings that the quantum demand had already been deleted by the CIT(A) in appeal, thereby ignoring a vital and determinative fact on record. 4. That the Learned CIT(A) erred in mechanically upholding the penalty by relying upon section 270A(2), without appreciating that the condition precedent for "under-reporting of income" ceases to exist once the assessed income itself is deleted in appellate proceedings. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing. 8. During the course of hearing before us, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the returned income and therefore the very condition precedent for invoking section 270A fails. Accordingly, the Learned AR prayed that the penalty of Rs. 8,69,241/- levied under section 270A of the Act be deleted. 10. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Learned CIT(A).The Learned DR contended that the Assessing Officer had rightly invoked the provisions of section 270A of the Act, as the assessed income was higher than the income originally declared or processed, thereby attracting the provisions relating to under-reporting of income. 11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material pla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....element of undisclosed income. iv. With regard to the amount of Rs. 2,08,700/-, it was held that the same represented payment towards purchase of property and not income. Accordingly, the addition under the head "income from other sources" was also deleted. v. The Learned CIT(A) further directed the Assessing Officer to consider the return filed by the assessee in response to notice under section 148 and allow due credit of TDS amounting to Rs. 15,05,804/-. Thus, the Learned CIT(A), after detailed examination of the facts and evidences, has deleted the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer and allowed the quantum appeal of the assessee. 13. In light of the above factual position, the core issue which arises f....