TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1184
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....)"] dated 26/11/2025, for A.Y. 2021-22, on the following grounds of appeal:- The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1) Whether on facts circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT A has erred in deleting the penalty of Rs 184572960 levied by the Assessing Officer under section 270A of the Income tax Act 1961 without appreciating the fact that the penalty proceedings are independent of the quantum proceedings and can survive notwithstanding deletion of addition at the appellate stage. 2) Whether on facts circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT A has erred in holding that since the quantum addition of Rs 856375446 has been deleted by the Hon'ble ITAT vide order dated 06 10 2025 there remai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y to the scheme and object of section 270A of the Act. 7) Whether on the facts, circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Tribunal was correct erred in holding that the payments received by the assessee from Atos India Private Limited are not taxable as fees for technical services under section 9 1 vii of the Income tax Act 1961 on which penalty under section 270A of the Act was levied. 8) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in mechanically following its earlier coordinate bench decision without appreciating the material change in facts namely that the payments were received from Atos India and not directly from Standard Chartered Bank on which penalty under section 270A of the Act was levied. 9) The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry either at or before the appeal hearing." 2. Brief facts of the case are as under:- Assessee is a company incorporated in Hong Kong and is a non-resident within the meaning of the provisions of the Act. The assessee is engaged in providing electronic data processing services through its data centre facility situated in Hong Kong. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 10/03/2022 declaring total income of Rs. 6,64,89,345/- being interest on income-tax refund. The assessee also received sub-contracting receipts amounting to Rs. 85,63,75,446/- from Eviden India Pvt. Ltd. in connection with the Standard Chartered Bank project. However, the assessee claimed that the said receipts were not chargeable ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "7.2. The appellant has submitted the copy of the order of Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT Mubmai vide order no ITA 4708/Mum/2023 pronounced on 06.10.2025 for the AY under consideration in respect of the appeal filed against the final assessment order dated 26.10.2023. As per the copy of the order submitted by the appellant, the Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai has held that the receipts of Rs. 85,63,75,446 are not to be considered as Royalty/FTS as per the provisions of the Act and thus not liable for taxation in India and in this regard has also referred to earlier decision dated 09.02.2017 in ITA 237 to 240/Mum/2016. 7.3. The appellant has claimed that the copy of decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai has been submitted to the AO, but appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee raised cross- objection challenging the validity of the penalty notice for being issued mechanically. We have perused the submissions advance by both sides in light of the record placed before us. 3. The short issue for our consideration is whether the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act is sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 3.1. It is noted that there is no allegation by the Revenue that the assessee suppressed any material fact or failed to disclose any particulars relating to the receipts earned during the year. On the contrary, the assessee disclosed the entire receipts received from Eviden India Pvt. Ltd. in its computation of income and had specifically appended a note stating that such receipts....