“mis-reporting of income”

PenaltySection 270ASection 270A132 judgments

The decision most relied on for mis-reporting of income is CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal (275 ITR 113), cited in 38 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on mis-reporting of income

CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal

275 ITR 113 · 2005 · High Court

citing judgments

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.

Schneider Electric South East Asia (HQ) PTE Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation) & Ors.

443 ITR 186 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

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.

Alrameez Construction (P.) Ltd. v. NFAC

152 Taxmann.com 382 · 2023 · ITAT

citing judgments

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.

Judgments citing mis-reporting of income

Jaina Marketing & Associates, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, Delhi

Accordingly, Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

word ‘under reported income’ but the penalty has been levied for ‘mis reporting of income’ and there is no whisper of allegation to ‘mis-reporting of income’ in the penalty notices. The said notice failed to state as to how the Assessee’s case/addition falls within instances given in clauses ... intended for ‘under reported income’. But the order of the penalty passed u/s 270A of the Act by the A.O. levying penalty for ‘mis-reporting of income’. The various High Courts and Benches of the Tribunal repeatedly held that the defective penalty notice issued by the Department without mentioning

Jaina Marketing & Associates, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-18, Delhi

Accordingly, Appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 224/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 132Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

Mayank Bansal, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1016/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 80G

disallowed and added back to total income of the assessee and penalty proceedings u/s 270A was also proposed to be initiated separately for mis-reporting of income. The assessee was asked as to why the proposed variation should not be made. 4 AY: 2018-19 Mayank Bansal

Rohit Kumar Kothari, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Acocuntant Member & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. AR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270A

added back to the total income of the assessee. Thereafter, Assessing Officer initiated separate penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for mis-reporting of income. Thus, Assessing Officer completed the assessment interalia making disallowance of Rs.25,44,350/- and passed assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B

Mahendra N Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 799/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Rajesh Revar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(6)Section 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(c)Section 57

source and interest expenses of Rs. 13,33,313/- as explained u/s. 57 of the Act. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings for mis-reporting of income and under reporting of income and show cause notice was issued u/s. 270A r.w.s. 3 I.T.A No. 799/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2020-21 Page ... reply the same, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs. 11,39,860/- for under reporting of income in consequence of mis-reporting of income u/s. 270A r.w.s. 274 of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the penalty order passed u/s. 270A of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before

Citizen Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Vadodara vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre Jurisdictional AO the Dy.CIT, Circle2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 891/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

891/Ahd/2023 for assessment year 2017-18, the Assessing Officer has levied penalty u/s. 270A for under reporting of income due to mis-reporting of income. 5 I.T.A Nos. 889, 890 & 891/Ahd/2023 A.Ys. 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Page No. Citizen Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT Herein ... assessee due to the various decisions at that juncture. Thus, this cannot be termed as under reporting of income due the mis-reporting of income. Hence, ITA 891/Ahd/2023 of assessment year 2017-18 is allowed. 8. In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order

Citizen Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Vadodara vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre Jurisdictional AO the Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 890/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Citizen Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Vadodara vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Juridictional AO the Dy.CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 889/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Bhuramal Rajmal Surana & Sons Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 254/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Her; (B) No Proceedings Were Directed To Be Initiated In Original Appeal Order Dt. 28.02.2022 And/Or; (C) It Has Been Passed In Haste Without Affording Reasonable Opportunity To The Appellant.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Manisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 270ASection 271ASection 41(1)Section 68

erred in law in directing initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the IT Act, 1961 against the appellant for alleged mis-reporting of income. 3. That the appellant craves permission to add to or amend to any of the above grounds of appeal or to withdraw any of them

Urvashi Narain, Usa vs. ITO, Ward Int. Taxation 2(1)(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1889/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(13)

credit for pre-paid tax after verification. Charge interest as applicable under the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s. 270A to be initiated separately for mis-reporting of income as per Income-Tax Act, 1961” 3.2 The assessee has also been issued a notice of demand under Section

Thr Infrastructure Pte Ltd, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Cir.-3(1)(1), Intl Tax, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1915/DEL/2022[201-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHIBENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Parsben Jivanbhai Vadhiya, Surat vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -2(3), Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse is allowed

ITA 47/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.47/Srt/2023 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Parasben Jivanbhai Vadhiya Deputy Commissioner Of 1, Village Budhaleshwar, Tal. Income-Tax, Circle-(3), Vs Mahuva, Surat-394250 Surat Pan No: Apvpv 0109 F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr Date Of Filing Appeal 25.01.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 06.03.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 06.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 05.01.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises Out Against The Penalty Levied By Assessing Officer Under Section 270A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 26.11.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of Assessing Officer In Imposing Penalty Of Rs.1,54,500/- U/S 270A Of The I.T.Act, 1961. Parasben J. Vadhiya 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Passing Ex-Parte Order Although Assessee Sought Adjournment Upto 12/01/2023. 3. It Is Therefore Prayed That Penalty Imposed By Assessing Officer & Confirmed By Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) May Please Be Deleted.

Section 139(1)Section 254(1)Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(6)Section 274Section 43B

assessee submits that as per the provision of section 270A(9) such disallowance does not fall into the category of mis-reporting of income in item (a) to (f) of section 270A of the Act. Accordingly, penalty @ 200% of tax payment is not leviable. 7. In alternative submission