TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in levying penalty u/s.270A of the Income Tax Act 1961 of Rs. 68,12,391/- being 50 percent of the tax payable on under reported income, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in imposing penalty of Rs. 68,12,391/- without appreciating the fact that the quantum of penalty imposed is not in accordance with the provision of section 270A of The Income Tax Act 1961, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cess had been claimed much prior to the said amendment and was otherwise supported by judicial precedents prevailing at the relevant point of time. 2.3. The assessee placed reliance upon the decision of the Sesa Goa Ltd. v. JCIT reported in 379 ITR 321, wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that "by no stretch of imagination can such a claim be said to constitute furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income or concealment of income." 2.4. The assessee further submitted that the legislature itself, while introducing the amendment, recognized the bona fide nature of such claims made in earlier years and, accordingly, inserted a special saving provision under section 155(18) of the Act, which excluded levy of penalty subject to fu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A). 3. The Ld.CIT(A) while confirming the penalty observed as under: "I have considered the submission of the assessee as filed above, case records and gone through the AO's observation & decision in penalty vis-a-vis assessment order. It is observed from the penalty order that the AO has imposed penalty of Rs. Rs. 68,12,391/- after being satisfied on completion of scrutiny assessment as per the acceptance of the appellant regarding proposed disallowance of deduction of education cess of Rs. 3,18,75,307/-. I find from the case records vis-à-vis assessment order that despite getting multiple opportunity of hearing the appellant miserably failed to file satisfactory compliance/explanation with supporting documents befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... stand confirmed and the grounds taken by the appellant are dismissed. 4. Aggrieved by the Order of the Ld.CIT(A) the assessee is an appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The Ld. AR reiterated the submissions advanced before the authorities below. It was submitted that the disallowance of education cess arose solely on account of the retrospective amendment introduced in the Income-tax Act by the Finance Act, 2022. The Ld. AR contended that, at the time of filing the return of income for the relevant assessment year, the assessee had claimed deduction of education cess under a bona fide belief, duly supported by prevailing judicial precedents, that such expenditure was allowable under the Act. 5.1. In support of the aforesaid contention,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he period of four years specified in sub-section (7) of section 154 being reckoned from the end of the previous year commencing on the 1st day of April, 2021: Provided that in a case where the assessee makes an application to the Assessing Officer in the prescribed form and within the prescribed time, requesting for recomputation of the total income of the previous year without allowing the claim for deduction of surcharge or cess and pays the amount due thereon within the specified time, such claim shall not be deemed to be under reported income for the purposes of sub-section (3) of section 2704.] 6.1. On a perusal of the aforesaid provision, it becomes evident that the proviso is in the nature of a beneficial and saving provi....