TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 1467
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the assessee exigible to tax was computed and assessed at Rs. 16,94,610/-. The return of income was at Rs. 9,20,910/-. An addition of Rs. 7,73,704/- was made on the ground of loss disallowed (House property). That the aforesaid assessment order is hereinafter referred to as the "impugned assessment order". In the "impugned assessment order" issuance of a penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 270A(1)/ 270A(9)(a) of the Act was contemplated too. 2.2 That as and by way of an order (penalty) passed u/s 270A of the Act i.e. "Misreporting penalty u/s 270A" a penalty of Rs. 4,16,860/- was levied on the assessee being 200% of Tax on unreported income. That the aforesaid penalty order bears No. ITBA/PNL/F/270A/2021-22/1041697988(1) and that same is dated 26.03.2022 which is hereinafter referred to as the "impugned penalty order". The core reason for levying penalty was recorded as under :- "5. xxxx Accordingly, the show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 29.11.2021 was served to the assessee. Assessee has furnished his submission through E-response on 01.01.2022 wherein, he has requested for immunity from penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act. Howeve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the same works out to Rs. 4,61,860/-. 10. I hereby levy penalty of Rs. 20,478/- (i.e. two hundred percent of the tax payable on the under reported income in consequence to misreporting of income). Working of penalty: Particulars Amount in Rs. 1.Assessed income 16,94,610/- 2. Under reported Income 7,73,704/- 3. Income excluding underreported income in consequence to misreporting of income (1-2) 9,20,906/- 4. Tax on Assessed Income (Tax+SC+EC only) 3,43,388/- 5. Tax on Income excluding under reported Income in consequence to misreported income (3) 1,12,458/- 6. Tax on underreported Income in consequence to misreported income (4-5) 2,30,930/- Penalty leviable at 200% 4,61,860/- Penalty leviable (Rounded off) 4,61,860/- (Rupees: Four Lacs sixty one thousand eight hundred and sixty only) This order has been passed after obtaining the prior approval from the Additional Commissioner of Income tax (IT), Ahmedabad as per section 274(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide letter issued vide DIN 22/1041672758(1) dated 26.03.2022." 2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the "impugned penalty order" prefer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ay application made before the first appellate authority i.e. Ld. CIT(A) was not considered and it was held that the same had not shown the "sufficient cause" for the purposes of the condonation of delay. There was a delay of 560 days in preferring the first appeal (Internal page 4 of the impugned order). It was urged that the "impugned penalty order" is dated 26.03.2022 and that the same was received by the assessee on 28.08.2023. The payment of fee of Rs. 1000/- was made on 26.08.2023 (Form No.35). The first appeal was filed on 06.11.2023. It was pleaded before the Ld. CIT(A) vide para 15 of the Form No.35 that the assessee is an officer in the Merchant Navy and that he was on ship. Only few documents were with him and as soon as he landed in India the appeal was filed. It was also submitted that a condonation of delay application was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) as aforesaid stated in the Form No.35 along with an affidavit in support. The same was not considered by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. The total delay in filing the first appeal was of 560 days. The Ld. AR has also now placed on record a photo copy of CDC (Continuous Discharge Certificate) of the assessee, a Merch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... BAIRAGH BHOPAL Respected Sir. Sub :- Penalty Proceedings u/s 270A of the Sub: Request for Immunity from Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2017-18 The assessee is in receipt of your notice under section 274 r.w.s. 270A of Income Tax Act 1961, dated 28.12.2019 consequent to assessment order passed by you honor for assessment year 2017-18 directing us to show cause as to why the said penalty u/s 270A should not be levied on us. Following points are submitted before you for your kind consideration and perisual. 1. Sir, it is humbly submitted that the assessee has shown the correct figures and pictures in the return of the total income filed by the assessee. Sir, there is no under reporting and misreporting of the income. 2. Sir, the intentions of the assessee are bonafide, however due to some technical glitch while filing the return of total income, the ALV of Rs. 180000.00 shown by the assessee has been reversed by the system which has resulted this situation, sir, similar facts are also submitted by the assessee during the course of the assessment proceedings. The facts has been duly verified from your office and confirmed that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of documents (compilation) for (Assessment Year 2017-18)] the revenue vide a notice dated 14.03.2022 stated that with reference to e-response dated 01.01.2022 wherein the request for the immunity from the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act is sought, the assessee has not furnished the Form No.68 as required as per Rule 129 in accordance with the provisions of section 270AA of the Act for the purpose of claiming the immunity from the penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act. The Ld. AR finally contended that the application for the immunity is made as can be inferred from letter dated 28.12.2021 (supra). The order of Ld. AO (quantum) is dated 28.12.2019 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The tax demands are all paid for both the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19. No appeals are filed on the quantum assessment orders for Assessment Years 2017-18 and 2018-19. Basis [set of documents (compilation) for (Assessment Year 2017-18)] it was submitted that an inference can be drawn that assessee's reply dated 28.12.2021 is nothing but an application within the meaning of section 270AA of the Act. The requirement of the Form No.68 therein is a procedural requirement in nature. Re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hin the period specified in notice of demand. (2) No appeal is filed against the assessment order. The Ld. AR therefore pleaded that in the instant case both these two conditions are satisfied by the assessee, the requisite tax with interest has been paid as per the demand notice and no first appeal is filed before the CIT(A) against the quantum assessment orders before CIT(A). The Ld. AR however with regard to the requirement of filling of form No.68 as per Section 270AA(2) contended that the Form No.68 was not filed. It was further argued that filing of the requisite form No.68 is procedural in nature and Section 270AA(2) of the Act should be liberally construed. It was contended that the "impugned assessment order" is dated 28.12.2019 (Assessment Year 2017-18). However as per the Ld. AR the exercise u/s 270AA of the Act was done on 01.01.2022. Reliance was placed on para 5 page 3 of the "impugned penalty order". Per contra Ld. DR additionally has submitted that there is delay in filing the first appeal for which no sufficient cause is shown and as far as merits are concerned u/s 270AA a strict mechanism and procedure is laid down with regard to the immunity from the imposition o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... This time gap is too not explained. In brief, no satisfactory explanation save and except that the assessee is in merchant navy and was on ship is given for 560 days delay from 26.03.2022 to 06.11.2023 therefore the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly held that no sufficient cause is shown and has dismissed the first appeal as time barred. We concur with his findings. Further basis CDC we hold that the assessee was on board a ship from 19.02.2021 to 28.10.2021, from 14.04.2022 to 21.10.2022 and from 11.05.2023 to 14.09.2023. It is therefore wrong on the part of the assessee to say that the impugned penalty order was received by him on 28.08.2023 when admittedly on this date the assessee was on ship i.e 11.05.2023 to 14.09.2023 [CDC (supra)]. It is also required to be noted that when the impugned penalty order was passed on 26.03.2022 the assessee was not on ship i.e. 14.04.2022 to 21.10.2022 [CDC (supra)]. We therefore hold that the assessee herein has failed to give satisfactory and bonafide explanation before the Ld. CIT(A) with regard to delay of 560 days in preferring the first appeal but has also failed to convince this tribunal on the ground of Bonafide and the sufficient cause. We conc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Foreign Give Tp Hiện Tree i green Bukure di Neve we sos ৳NTG: AVIS ... 4.Jan Coesla 2nd Eng FG. 1: She (2) ENG F.G (12 CeQucenter 2/ (2) समà¥à¤¹à¥€ पाठके बार WHY 4 0 AU TAT ali ud (94) 40831. ----- Emma if Ship offariNo, meTotural Martane OgAI (MOINE F1 9PTH NEnumen CA GLOBE POLARIS 51539-29-A 14Apr 2/21 21 OCT 2022 AGIL NO. CRu4108 POR PANAMA PANAMA IMO NO. 0679703 BALRA PANcon CALL SIGN HPGC 48.825.00 18.710.00 KWV 13.700:00 11 MAY 2023 KASASAKI 14 SEP 2023 YOSU, LOREA [8) . . GLOBE ATLAS CALL SIGN! 3FTOZ POR PANAMA JAPAN IND Ne 9788650 OFT NO 40747-KJ AT 47.995 14,390 13.000 -.- đình -- - -- vụ · ThÆ°Æ¡ng taanhà mẹ p to Ned 1821 115.30% of Engagement & Bacha ce Datills of Voyages MERFR T+ Funk: c4 Sultet BETFarmi/ HIN -19 7518 WAROF Dasani: Jon of voyages FriGia Hos ColdEl law [ IdinCon ÃT NHÀ VAR 6gro areci keser w h ssel SLENG Encenene F.G. (1) MAL (2) MA 170 ENDONCE A SECOND FG $ AU GLOBEATLAS Ashot I MASTER the domaineco ....