“under-reporting of income”
The decision most relied on for under-reporting of income is CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal (275 ITR 113), cited in 38 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on under-reporting of income
The omission by an Income Tax Officer to initiate penalty proceedings during the assessment, when there is an observation of under-reporting or mis-reporting of income, renders the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, granting the Commissioner jurisdiction to revise such an order under Section 263.
Penalty under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, cannot be imposed if the Assessing Officer fails to specify which clause under Section 270A(9) applies and fails to show cause to the assessee accordingly. Strict adherence to the conditions of Section 270A is mandatory for its applicability.
Penalty under Section 270A for under-reporting or mis-reporting of income cannot be sustained if additions are made under Section 56(2)(x) and the penalty notice fails to specify the limb under which proceedings are initiated.
Immunity from penalty under Section 270AA may be granted if the assessment order is silent on how the ingredients of Section 270A(9) are satisfied, and the penalty notice fails to specify whether the penalty is for 'under-reporting' or 'misreporting' of income.
Penalty under section 270A cannot be sustained without the Assessing Officer specifying the exact charge against the assessee, including which part of section 270A(9) is attracted. Immunity under section 270AA may be granted if the Assessing Officer fails to specify the relevant sub-clause of section 270A(9) or mechanically passes an order without considering the assessee's replies.
Penalty under section 270A is not leviable in the absence of specifying the sub-clause of section 270A(9) under which the penalty is initiated.
