2024 (9) TMI 1102 - AT - Income Tax

Proceedings u/s. 270A(8) - under reporting of income as a sequence of misreporting - AO relevant show cause notice dated 19.09.2022 nowhere specified the corresponding limbs in clauses (a) to (f) to sub-section 9 read with subsection (8) thereof HELD THAT - We find no merit in Revenue s arguments placing reliance on M/s. Veena Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2024 (1) TMI 701 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT once the issue before their lordships was that of the concerned appellant seeking to frame an additional substantial question of law in section 260A proceedings whereas the law regarding the tribunal s jurisdiction to entertain such a pure question of law, not requiring any further detailed investigation on facts, is already settled in NTPC Ltd. 1996 (12) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT That being the case, we are of the considered view that going by the foregoing judicial precedent, this tribunal is very much entitled to entertain and decide such a pure legal plea for the first time in section 254(1) proceedings. We accordingly reject the Revenue s instant technical arguments to conclude in light of section 270A (8) (9) r.w. clauses (a to f) that the learned Assessing Officer s failure to pinpoint the corresponding default of assessee s part indeed vitiates the entire proceedings as per Schneider Electric South Asia Ltd 2022 (3) TMI 1295 - DELHI HIGH COURT and Md. Farhan S.A. 2021 (3) TMI 608 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT (LB) in section 271(1)(c) old penal provision. We order accordingly.

Summary

The ITAT Pune allowed the assessee's appeal against the penalty imposed under section 270A for assessment year 2020-21. The tribunal held that the penalty proceedings were vitiated as the Assessing Officer failed to specify the relevant clauses under section 270A(9). The penalty of Rs. 15,54,736/- was deleted. The decision was based on legal precedents and the tribunal's jurisdiction to decide pure legal issues.