2024 (6) TMI 985

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) thereof - HELD THAT:- In the instant appeal that the impugned penalty proceedings stand vitiated on account of the AO s failure to pinpoint the relevant clauses (a) to (f) to sub-section (9); while initiating the proceedings herein u/s. 270A(8) of the Act, thereby alleging under reporting of income as a sequence of misreporting. Faced with this situation, we find no merit in Revenue s arguments .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of section 270A (8) (9) r.w. clauses (a to f) that the AO 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 [ 2021 (3) TMI 608 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT (LB)] in section 271(1)(c) old penal provision. The impugned penalty stands deleted in very terms. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6.2021 nowhere specified the corresponding limbs in clauses (a) to (f) to sub-section 9 read with sub- section (8) thereof. His case in other words is that the Assessing Officer has failed to comply with the rigor of section 270A(8) and (9) (a to f) before concluding that the assessee committed any default of under-reporting of income as a consequence to misreporting. 3. Learned DR vehemently argu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant clauses (a) to (f) to sub-section (9); while initiating the proceedings herein u/s. 270A(8) of the Act, thereby alleging under reporting of income as a sequence of misreporting. Faced with this situation, we find no merit in Revenue s arguments placing reliance on M/s. Veena Estate Pvt. Ltd. (supra) once the issue before their lordships was that of the concerned appellant seeking to frame an a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 22) 443 ITR 186 (Del) Schneider Electric South Asia Ltd. Vs. ACIT (in the new scheme) and Md. Farhan Vs. ACIT (2021) 434 ITR 1 (Bom.) in section 271(1)(c) old penal provision. We order accordingly. The impugned penalty of Rs. 98,324/- stands deleted in very terms. 5. Delay of 533 days in filing the assessee s instant appeal stands condoned in light of his condonation averments going un-rebutted fr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X