TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 1441
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reinafter called 'the Act'). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21. 2. The solitary issue that is raised is whether the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is justified in confirming the penalty imposed u/s. 270A of the Act amounting to Rs. 2,57,631/-. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee had not filed his return of income for the assessment year 2020-21 u/s. 139 of the Act. Assessee had made substantial financial transaction in the stock market and incurred loss of Rs. 1,97,056/-. Assessee for the relevant assessment year was working with TCS and Ashok Leyland and had received salary amounting to Rs. 22,76,480/-, for which there was TDS. Since, no return of income was filed by the assessee, notice u/s. 148 of the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Further, the FAA noted that assessee had substantial transaction in the share market. The relevant finding of the FAA reads as follows:- "4.3 ............................. On careful consideration it is seen that the appellant did not file the ROI despite having substantial taxable income. It is not the case that the appellant was not aware of the obligation to file the ROI, the appellant has been having substantial transactions of more than Rs.13 crore in the share market. Considering these facts the general explanation adduced by the appellant Is not found acceptable. The appellant's case is duly covered by the provisions of section 270A of the Act. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the action of AO and the pen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2025 were issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and not by the Faceless Accessing Officer. e. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department erred in considering the Appellant's income as misreporting of income, when it doesn't come under any of the purview of Section 270-A (9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. f. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department failed to appreciate the facts that the Appellant in response to the show cause dated 15.01.2025, requested the Respondent to drop the penalty proceedings, which could have been considered as application to claim immunity under section 270-AA though it was not in specific format. Thus the Respondent failed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5,26,174/-, a sum of Rs. 5,12,810/- was paid by way of TDS and balance sum of Rs. 10,912/- was on account of penalty for not filing the return of income and interest u/s. 234A of the Act. Therefore, it was contended that more than 99% of tax has been paid by way of TDS and assessee had no intention to conceal his income. It was stated that this fact is also clearly borne out from the assessment order dated 15.01.2025 at page 4, wherein it has been clearly stated that assessee's claim was corroborated with the available record and the return of income has been accepted. Therefore, it was contended that the explanation of the assessee is bonafide u/s.270A(6)(a) of the Act. The Ld.AR further submitted that on identical facts, Ahmedabad Bench o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at he was not been able to file the return of income on account of he and his family members suffering from Covid during the covid-19 pandemic. It was stated that thereafter multiple attempts were made to file the returns, which was in vain, since system did not allow to submit. 10. The assessee had traded in stock market and has gross turnover exceeding Rs.13 crores. However, it is clear from the written submissions of the Ld.DR that trading in shares had resulted in loss of Rs. 1,97,056/- (para 1 of the Ld. DR submissions). Pursuant to the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act, return of income was filed by assessee declaring total income of Rs. 22,76,480/- (income from salary). The return of income was accepted by the AO and assessment was....