9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, vide order dated 16.03.2023. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: '1. That the Order of the CIT-A which upheld the levy of penalty under section 270A-9 passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer is erroneous on the facts and the merits of the case and provisions of Law as well and hence requires to be quashed. 2. That the CIT-A erred in failing to appreciate that the levy of penalty on a debatable issue is prohibited under the law, when no malafide intention on the part of the appellant has been established by the AO. 3. For those and other reasons that may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is prayed by the Appellant that the Honourable ITAT may be pleased to delete the unjust and inexplicable levy of penalty and thus render justice'. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to further challenge. Penalty under section 270A was initiated through a separate notice dated 08.09.2022 and finally, ignoring the pleas of the appellant that the provisions of Section 270A-6-are squarely applicable, while the claim having been subject to disputes at various courts, is therefore debatable and hence levy of penalty is unsolicited. However, the AO, in the order dated 16-03-2023 levied penalty under section 270A-9- computed at 200 percent resulting a demand of Rs. 5,48,464/-. The same was contested under section 246A and statement of facts and Grounds of Appeal were clearly submitted. Amongst various grounds, the appellant had attempted to impress that when the claim of exemption is debatable and while no malafide intentions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xemption of leave encashment received from BSNL on termination of h services. As such the penalty levied by the AO u/s. 270A(9)(a) of the Act has been correctly done and consequently this ground of appeal raised by the appellant is dismissed''. 4. Before us, the ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee has disclosed everything in her return of income. The ld. Counsel further submitted that the assessee under bonafide reasons claimed exemption u/s 10(10AA) which is found excess by the AO. The ld. Counsel filed the order of the Pune Tribunal in the case of Adinath Vasantrao Wandhekar Vs Income Tax Officer [ITA No.1388/PUN/2023 dated 08.03.2024] and contended that in similar circumstances the Tribunal quashed the order of penalty on the same i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) secondly, the genuine explanation offered by the appellant in support of her mistaken but bona fide belief and disclosed all material facts of her service & the circumstance which swayed to claim full exemption in her revised ITR. We are of the considered view that her conduct squarely falls within clause (a) of sub-section (6) of section 270A of the Act, therefore the under-reported income shall not include the bona fide explanation hence, pardonable (iii) and finally, the imposition of penalty is at the discretion of Ld. AO, since sub-section (1) of section 270A of the Act, refers to the word 'may' and not as 'shall'. The word "may" used in sub-section (1) of section 270A shall have to be read as an enabling discretionar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
