← All Phrases

“penalty u/s 270A”

PenaltySection 270ASection 270A583 judgments

The decision most relied on for penalty u/s 270A is HCIL Arsspl Triveni (JV) v. ACIT ( (274 ITR 603), cited in 21 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on penalty u/s 270A

HCIL Arsspl Triveni (JV) v. ACIT (
274 ITR 603 · 2005 · High Court
21
citing judgments

An inaccurate claim made by the assessee cannot be treated as a case of giving inaccurate particulars of income for the purpose of imposing penalty.

GR Infraprojects Ltd. v. ACIT
158 Taxmann.com 80 · 2024 · High Court
11
citing judgments

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.

Judgments citing penalty u/s 270A

Jayantibhai Jivabhai Patel, Bharuch vs. Ward No. 1(1), Bharuch

In the result, the penalty imposed under Section 270A of the Act is directed to be deleted and the appeal of the assessee succeeds

ITA 962/SRT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: None for AssesseeFor Respondent: Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 270(9)Section 270ASection 270A(6)Section 270A(7)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

word 'may' in sub-section (i) of section 270A of the Act, its conveys the intention of the Parliament that levy of penalty u/s 270A of the Act is not mandatory 3. Section 270A(9) says, what is under-reported income and section 270A(7) says that such income ... from the appellant found by AO. This is a case of purely under reporting of income by the appellant which is liable for penalty u/s 270A(7) at the rate of 50% of under reporting of income. Misreporting clause will be attracted only when there is misrepresentation of facts

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Muralikrishna Vaddi, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 494/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Visakhapatnam28 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Balakrishnan, S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.494/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dy. Cit Vs. Shri Muralikrishna Vaddi Circle 3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam Pan: Awmpv9717D (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri A Chakradhar, Ca (Hybrid) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 28/04/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 04/10/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri A Chakradhar, CA (Hybrid)For Respondent: : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 148Section 270Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(9)Section 90

permissible, then it amounts to mis-reporting of tax relief to the sextent of Rs.37,63,898/- and liable to levy of penalty u/s 270A of the I.T. Act, 1961. Page 2 of 6 ITA No.494 of 2024 Muralikrishna Vaddi 4. On the other hand, the learned ... total tax of the assessee because the assessee filed Form-67 after due date of filing the Income Tax Return and the penalty u/s 270A(9) of the I.T. Act, 1961 is initiated”. 6. The Assessing Officer then initiated the proceedings to levy the penalty u/s 270A

Infoobjects Software India Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 4, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1499/JPR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1499/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Infoobjects Software India Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Private Ltd. Income Tax, 5-E Patrikayan, 3rd Floor Jhalana Circle-04, Jaipur Institutional Area, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCI8663B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/ Assessee by : Sh. Naman Maloo, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by

For Appellant: Sh. Naman Maloo, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. P. Meena, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 201Section 40Section 92B(2)

catering expenditure of Rs.75,15,792/- amounting to Rs.22,54,737/-is being disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961. Penalty u/s 270A of the IT Act, 1961 for under reporting of income is also being initiated separately. AO’s comments: The contention of the assessee ... being disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961, as no TDS has been deducted on these payment. Penalty u/s 270A of the IT Act, 1961 for under reporting of income is also being initiated separately. 6. Aggrieved from the above observation of the assessing officer while making

Raigad Darshan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Pune vs. ITO Ward 8(3), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 532/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 532/Pun/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vs Ito Ward 8(3), Raigad Darshan Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Pune Maryadit, Krishna Vatika, Jyotiba Nagar, Surve No. 77/1/2/1 Kalewadi, Kalewadi B.O-411017 Maharashtra Pan-Aacar7156B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Miss Kimya KudvaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B Budruk-
Section 250Section 270Section 270ASection 80P

request. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 2 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming penalty u/s 270A of the ITA, 1961 levied by learned AO amounting to Rs 33,46,386/- (i.e. 200% of tax payable) for misreporting of income. Learned ... make all the requisite submissions along with related documentary evidence. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by upholding penalty u/s 270A of the ITA, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the learned AO has not recorded any satisfaction on whether the penalty is for "under

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 571/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

Bhagirath Pakhria, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 570/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 569/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 568/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 567/AGR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 566/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

Bhagirath Pakharia, Jhansi vs. Ward 2 (3)(1), Jhansi

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 565/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.565/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.566/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 567/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 568/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 569/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 570/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 571/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Bhagirath Pakharia Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 124, Nanak Ganj, Sipri Bazar, Ward 2(3)(1), Jhansi. Vs. Jhansi (Up) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Amdpp-6709-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Prarthana Jalan, Ca – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-04-2025

For Appellant: Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

after making addition under the head Capital Gains for Rs.112.99 Lacs by invoking the provisions of Sec.50C. Against the same, Ld. AO levied penalty u/s 270A for Rs.13.38 Lacs vide order dated 28-02-2024 which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in order dated

The Chanour Co-Operative Aggriculture Service Society Limited, Kangra vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - Dharamshala, Dharamshala

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 464/CHANDI/2024[2017-18 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 464/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Chanour Co-Operative Agriculture Ito - Dharamshala Service Society Ltd. Himachal Pradesh. बनाम/ C/O Shri Tejmohan Singh Vs. #527, Sector-10D Chandigarh – 160011 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacat-7465-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Adv.) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 28-02-2024 Confirming Penalty U/S 270A For Rs.57,715/- As Levied By Ld. Ao Vide Order Dated 14-12-2021 In The Matter Of Quantum Assessment As Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) On 23-12-2019. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

For Appellant: Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Adv.) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(c)

order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 28-02-2024 confirming penalty u/s 270A for Rs.57,715/- as levied by Ld. AO vide order dated 14-12-2021 in the matter of quantum assessment as framed by Ld. Assessing Officer ... computation of income. Against assessed income of Rs.3.83 Lacs, tax payable came to be Rs.1.15 Lacs. Consequently, Ld. AO levied impugned penalty u/s 270A for Rs.57,715/- for under-reporting of income. 4. During appellate proceedings, the assessee, inter-alia, stated that the claims were bona-fide claims. The assessee

Deohara Co-Operative Cane Development Union Limited, Bijnor vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Bijnor

In the result, appeals of the assessee in Appeal Nos

ITA 2852/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2851/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2018-19) The Income Tax Seohara Co-Operative Cane Officer, Development Union Vs. Ward-3(1), Limited, 34-Station Road, Nazibabad-1, Up Seohara, Bijnor-246746. Pan-Aabas4970K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Gurneet, Adv. Department By Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Three Separate Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) & All Are Dated 23.3.2024 For Ay 2018-19 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). Seohara Co-Operative Cane Development Union India Vs. Ito 2. As All The Three Appeals Are Related To One Assessment Year Against Three Seperate Orders Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B & Consequential Penalty Order U/S 270A & 271B Of The Act, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Filed By The Assessee On Account Of Delay In Filing The Respective Appeals. Since The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Relating To Dismissal Of Appeals Without Condoning The Delay In Filing, Thus All The Three Appeals Are Taken Together & Disposed Off By A Single Order.

Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 271BSection 44A

which was dismissed in limine as the same was filed delayed by 71 days. In the meantime, the AO has levied the penalty u/s 270A for under reporting of income and also u/s 271B for filing the audit report u/s 44AB after the stipulated date. These appeals were also filed

Seohara Co-Operative Cane Development Union Limited, Bijnor vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Bijnor

In the result, appeals of the assessee in Appeal Nos

ITA 2851/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2851/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2018-19) The Income Tax Seohara Co-Operative Cane Officer, Development Union Vs. Ward-3(1), Limited, 34-Station Road, Nazibabad-1, Up Seohara, Bijnor-246746. Pan-Aabas4970K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Gurneet, Adv. Department By Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Three Separate Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) & All Are Dated 23.3.2024 For Ay 2018-19 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). Seohara Co-Operative Cane Development Union India Vs. Ito 2. As All The Three Appeals Are Related To One Assessment Year Against Three Seperate Orders Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B & Consequential Penalty Order U/S 270A & 271B Of The Act, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Filed By The Assessee On Account Of Delay In Filing The Respective Appeals. Since The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Relating To Dismissal Of Appeals Without Condoning The Delay In Filing, Thus All The Three Appeals Are Taken Together & Disposed Off By A Single Order.

Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 271BSection 44A

which was dismissed in limine as the same was filed delayed by 71 days. In the meantime, the AO has levied the penalty u/s 270A for under reporting of income and also u/s 271B for filing the audit report u/s 44AB after the stipulated date. These appeals were also filed

Seohara Co-Operative Cane Development Union Limited, Bijnor vs. ITO Ward 3(1), Bijnor

In the result, appeals of the assessee in Appeal Nos

ITA 2850/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2851/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2018-19) The Income Tax Seohara Co-Operative Cane Officer, Development Union Vs. Ward-3(1), Limited, 34-Station Road, Nazibabad-1, Up Seohara, Bijnor-246746. Pan-Aabas4970K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Gurneet, Adv. Department By Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Three Separate Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) & All Are Dated 23.3.2024 For Ay 2018-19 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act). Seohara Co-Operative Cane Development Union India Vs. Ito 2. As All The Three Appeals Are Related To One Assessment Year Against Three Seperate Orders Passed U/S 144 R.W.S. 144B & Consequential Penalty Order U/S 270A & 271B Of The Act, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Filed By The Assessee On Account Of Delay In Filing The Respective Appeals. Since The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Relating To Dismissal Of Appeals Without Condoning The Delay In Filing, Thus All The Three Appeals Are Taken Together & Disposed Off By A Single Order.

Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 271BSection 44A

which was dismissed in limine as the same was filed delayed by 71 days. In the meantime, the AO has levied the penalty u/s 270A for under reporting of income and also u/s 271B for filing the audit report u/s 44AB after the stipulated date. These appeals were also filed

Amarjit Singh HUF, Baghapurana, Moga vs. ITO Ward 1, Moga

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 307/ASR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Das Gupta

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 250Section 270A

Without prejudice to above the additions made are unjust and highly excessive. 6, Without prejudice to above the AO has erred in initiating penalty u/s 270A of the Act. 7. The Appellant craves leave to add, to alter to amend the above Ground of Appeal at the time of hearing

Power Security Corp. Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-5(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1947/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 1947/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, Power Security Corp Private V. Corporate Ward 5(2), Ltd., Chennai. New No.18, Old No.22, Lake Area, 1St Cross Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aagcp 2703C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Advocate : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By Cit & Ms. Anitha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 13.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.04.2025 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 147Section 148Section 270A

assessee has raised the following grounds:- 1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the order of the ld. AO in imposing penalty u/s 270A without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The ld. CIT (A) has failed to note that the ld. AO has imposed ... year under consideration and no tax was evaded. 3. The ld. CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the ld. AO has levied penalty u/s 270A purely on the basis of estimated income at a higher figure of Rs.22.06 lakhs on best judgment, than what was admitted by the appellant

Pushpa Harshadrai Parekh, Mumbai vs. ITO-32(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3121/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pushpa Harshadari Parekh, Ito-32(2)(1), Flat No. B/2 Krupali Geenay Co-Op. Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra Hsg. Soc. Ltd. Sai Baba Nagar Vs. (East), Borivali (W), Mumbai-51. Mumbai-400092. Pan No. Afgpp 9632 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Mr. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR
Section 234Section 270A

same to DVO and without granting video conferencing for personal hearing. 2. The Assessing Officer wrongly charged interest u/s. 234 and initiated penalty u/s. 270A. 3. In the facts and the circumstances of law, the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax(A) erred in confirming all the mentioned grounds without granting ... therefore prays as follows, 1. To delete the addition of Rs 3649473/- 2. To delete the interest charged u/s 234 and initiation of penalty u/s 270A. 2. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has opted to settle the issue in dispute involved

Prakash Chand Varindani, Jaipur vs. ACIT Certal Cirlce-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1146/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Him. 2

For Appellant: Sh. Abhishek Soni, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 144Section 40A(3)Section 68

assessed u/s 144 of the I.T. Act in the status of Individual at a total income Rs.1,68,57,133/-. Penalty u/s 270A, u/s 271AAC. u/s 270A(9)(c), initiated separately for misreporting/under reporting the facts as discussed above. Penalty u/s 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance of statutory notices

Soregam Sa, Belgium vs. ACIT International Taxation Tax Gurgaon, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1919/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 & 1923/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2017-18 बनाम Shri Vinod Jindal, Dcit, H.No.1203A, Tower C-3, Vs. Central Circle-2, Srs Pearl Heights, Faridabad. Sector-87, Faridabad. Pan No.Aenpj1202Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250Section 270ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

appeal in ITA No.1923/Del/2025 is filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in sustaining penalty u/s 270A of the Act for AY 2017-18. SHRI VINOD JINDAL 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that penalty orders passed u/s 271(1)(c) & 270A are invalid ... misreporting its income, to the tune of Rs.3,94,996/-. Therefore, I am satisfied that it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The amount of penalty that is to be levied for the fault of under reporting income in consequence