RAJIV ARUN MALKAN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 42(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2756/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 July 2026AY 2019-208 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction for a donation to a political party, which was later withdrawn after the assessment was reopened due to information about a bogus donation racket. The Assessing Officer also found an omission of bond interest income and initiated penalty proceedings.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the timing of withdrawal of a claim alone cannot constitute 'misreporting' under Section 270A(9) without independent evidence. It also found that the omission of bond interest was a small amount and not necessarily misreporting. The assessee was granted protection under Section 270A(6)(a).

What were the issues?

Whether the withdrawal of a deduction claim after reopening and omission of small interest income constitute 'misreporting' under Section 270A(9), and if Section 270A(6)(a) provides immunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 80GGC,Section 147,Section 270A(9),Section 270A(6)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

For Respondent: Shri Ashutosh Singh SR.DR

PERSHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A) NFAC vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1085474476(1) dated 02-Feb- 2026 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

Ground 1: Order is Non-Speaking — Judicial Precedents Dismissed Without Reasoning

The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC erred in dismissing all 12 judicial precedents cited by the Appellant — in

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,123 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →