TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 323
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....27/03/2025 passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s. 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), for the Assessment Year 2019-20, on the following grounds of appeal:- "1) (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty levied u/s. 270A of the Act of Rs. 2,02,96,664/- by merely following the order of the Hon'ble ITAT, however, the said ITAT order has not attained finality, as the said decision has not been accepted by the department and is in process to file appeal before the Hon'ble High Court on the same issue. 2) (ii) The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, OR withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing." 2. Brief facts of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it arose from an inadvertent error in adopting the date of acquisition of bonus shares; that the issue relating to foreign taxes on dividend income had been restored by the Ld.CIT(A) to the Ld.AO for verification; and that the disallowance of payments made to auto dealers was pending in quantum appeal before this Tribunal. 2.3. The Ld.AO did not accept the explanation furnished by the assessee. The Ld.AO treated the aforesaid sum of Rs. 11,61,93,472/- as under-reported income and levied penalty of Rs. 2,02,96,664/-, being 50% of the tax payable thereon, vide order dated 27/03/2025 passed u/s. 270A of the Act. Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). 3. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he quantum proceedings. As regards the grandfathering benefit, the Ld.CIT(A) held that the claim resulted from a bona fide and inadvertent error in adopting the date of acquisition of the bonus shares. The Ld.CIT(A) further observed that the Revenue's ground challenging the relief granted in respect of the grandfathering benefit had been dismissed by this Tribunal. In respect of the foreign taxes on dividend income, the Ld.CIT(A) held that the issue had been restored to the Ld.AO for verification and, therefore, penalty could not be sustained when the quantum itself had not attained finality. 3.3. The Ld.CIT(A) also noted that the Ld.AO had not specified the precise clause of section 270A(2) under which the assessee's case fell. It was f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dealers. We note that this Tribunal, in assessee's own case for the year under consideration in ITA No. 2623/Mum/2024, vide order dated 21/11/2025, deleted the aforesaid disallowance by observing as under: "206. During the course of hearing both the sides had agreed that our finding/adjudication on the Ground No. 3 to 6 raised in appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2012-2013 shall apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding grounds (Ground No. 1 to 4) raised in the present appeal for the Assessment Year 2019-2020. Thus, keeping in view the parity in the facts and circumstances, and adopting the reasoning given while adjudicating identical grounds raised in appeal preferred by the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her, the principal claim of the assessee concerning the grandfathering benefit was substantially accepted in the quantum proceedings, and the Revenue's challenge in respect of the relief granted on this issue was dismissed by this Tribunal. In any event, the explanation furnished by the assessee regarding the inadvertent error in adopting the date of acquisition was supported by the material available on record and was not demonstrated by the Ld.AO to be false. 5.4. Section 270A(6)(a) specifically excludes from the ambit of under-reported income an amount in respect of which the assessee offers a bona fide explanation and discloses all the material facts necessary to substantiate such explanation. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal i....