Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer (AO) imposed a penalty under Section 270A(9) for excessive deduction claimed by the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted the penalty after accepting the assessee's explanation of a clerical mistake and software glitch.
Held
The Tribunal found that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) had properly verified the assessee's explanation. Consequently, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh verification and decision, allowing the assessee an opportunity to substantiate the claim.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's explanation for an erroneous deduction was adequately verified by the lower authorities, and if the penalty was correctly deleted.
Sections Cited
270A(9), 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HONBLE & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, HONBLE
The above captioned appeal is preferred by the revenue against the order dated 29.05.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A)-43, Delhi u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as, “Act”] for A.Y. 2020-21.
Brief facts of the case are that penalty u/s 270A(9) of Rs. 1,18,58,340/- had been levied by the Ld. AO on the ground that assessee had claimed excessive deduction of Rs. 1,80,00,000/- without any supporting evidence, resulting in under reporting(in consequence of misreporting) of income. Aggrieved by the Ld. AO’s penalty, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee’s appeal was allowed by Ld. CIT(A) after accepting his explanation that the claim was made due to ‘clerical mistake and software glitch’ and the same
1 | P a g e 4349_DEL_2025_Manik Wadhwa was rectified by the assessee after it came to his knowledge on receiving the notice for scrutiny. Accordingly, vide order dated 29.05.2025, he deleted the penalty of Rs. 1,18,58,340/- u/s 270A(9) of the Act. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that both the lower authorities have not verified the assessee’s explanation regarding erroneous claim being made on account of clerical mistake and software glitch. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to Ld. AO for verification and decide the matter afresh after giving due opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his claim. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 28 -01-2026.