MRINALINI JAYANT PURANIK,PUNE V. ITO, WARD-2(2), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1790/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mrinalini Jayant Puranik, who did not initially file her income tax return for the assessment year 2019-20. Upon reopening the assessment, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 148 and accepted the returned income of Rs.70,13,970. However, a penalty was levied under Section 270A for under-reporting of income. The assessee appealed against this penalty, arguing that she had filed for immunity under Section 270AA, which the Assessing Officer did not address within the statutory time limit. The Tribunal, referencing decisions from the Delhi High Court, found in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of the Assessing Officer's compliance with procedural timelines in granting immunity from penalties.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789691 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Nirman Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC, Ultimate Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC & Anr.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A D KULKARNI
• Assessee Lawyers: SUHAS KULKARNI
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; TDS
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1); 270AA

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2019-20 Mrinalini Jayant Puranik Flat 14, Khagol Coop Society, S.No.38/1, Panchavati, Pashan, Pune – 411008 Vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Pune PAN: ALMPP5163E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Suhas Kulkarni Department by : Shri A D Kulkarni Date of hearing : 26-11-2025 Date of pronouncement : 28-11-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.05.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2019-20. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the penalty of Rs.10,96,347/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed her return of income for the impugned assessment year. Since as per the TDS Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 statement the assessee has received various income to the tune of Rs.2,63,15,529/-, the Assessing Officer, after recording reasons, issued notice to reopen the assessment as per provisions of section 147 of the Act and accordingly notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. The assessee in response to the same filed the return declaring total income at Rs.70,13,970/-. the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Act to the assessee in response to which the assessee filed the requisite details from time to time. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer accepted the returned income. However, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act for under-reporting of income. Accordingly, a show cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 270A of the Act was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee made her submissions. She also filed an application for grant of immunity in Form No.68. The assessee filed a copy of challan evidencing the payment of such tax. 4. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the submissions of the assessee. He noted that although the Assessing Officer has accepted the returned income declaring total income of Rs.70,13,970/-, however, the assessment proceedings in this case were completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. The income declared by the assessee is more than the maximum amount chargeable to tax. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.10,96,347/- being the penalty @ 50% of tax payable for under-reporting of income as per provisions of section 270A of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 5. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the action of the Assessing Officer by observing as under: Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that 90% of tax has been deducted from the various income declared by the assessee. Further, the Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 returned income was accepted by the Assessing Officer. Referring to page 7 of the paper book, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew the attention of the Bench to Form No.68 filed by the assessee for grant of immunity. Referring to the provisions of section 270AA(4) of the Act, he submitted that since the assessee had filed Form No.68 on 29.02.2024, therefore, the Assessing Officer was required to pass an order either granting or rejecting the immunity within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the immunity application was filed by the assessee u/s 270AA(1) of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer in the instant case has not passed any such order. Therefore, the assessee cannot be held responsible. 8. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nirman Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC vide W.P(C) No.5839/2022 & CM Appls.17517- 17518/2022, order dated 08.04.2022, he submitted that under identical circumstances the Hon’ble High Court has directed the Assessing Officer to grant immunity u/s 270AA of the Act to the petitioner and the penalty so levied was directed to be deleted. 9. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ultimate Infratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC & Anr. vide W.P(C) No.6305/2022 & CM Appls.18990-18991/2022, order dated 20.04.2022, he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court following the earlier decision has directed the Assessing Officer to Printed from counselvise.com 8 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 grant immunity u/s 270AA of the Act. He also relied on various other decisions filed in the paper book. 10. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 11. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find due to non-filing of the return, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment as per provisions of section 147 of the Act and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, in response to which the assessee filed her return of income declaring total income of Rs.70,13,970/-. We find the Assessing Officer accepted the returned income but initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act and levied penalty of Rs.10,96,347/- being the penalty @ 50% of tax payable for under- reporting of income as per provisions of section 270A of the Act. We find the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC confirmed the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that 90% of tax has already been deducted from the income so declared by the assessee. Further, during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee has filed Form No.68 on 29.02.2024. We find the provisions of section 270AA of the Act read as under: Printed from counselvise.com 9 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 “Immunity from imposition of penalty, etc. 270AA. (1) An assessee may make an application to the Assessing Officer to grant immunity from imposition of penalty under section 270A and initiation of proceedings under section 276C or section 276CC, if he fulfils the following conditions, namely:— (a) the tax and interest payable as per the order of assessment or reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 147, as the case may be, has been paid within the period specified in such notice of demand; and (b) no appeal against the order referred to in clause (a) has been filed. (2) An application referred to in sub-section (1) shall be made within one month from the end of the month in which the order referred to in clause (a) of sub- section (1) has been received and shall be made in such form and verified in such manner as may be prescribed. (3) The Assessing Officer shall, subject to fulfilment of the conditions specified in sub-section (1) and after the expiry of the period of filing the appeal as specified in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 249, grant immunity from imposition of penalty under section 270A and initiation of proceedings under section 276C or section 276CC, where the proceedings for penalty under section 270A has not been initiated under the circumstances referred to in sub-section (9) of the said section 270A. (4) The Assessing Officer shall, within a period of one month from the end of the month in which the application under sub-section (1) is received, pass an order accepting or rejecting such application: Provided that no order rejecting the application shall be passed unless the assessee has been given an opportunity of being heard. (5) The order made under sub-section (4) shall be final. (6) No appeal under section 246A or an application for revision under section 264 shall be admissible against the order of assessment or reassessment, referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1), in a case where an order under sub-section (4) has been made accepting the application.” 12. We find although the assessee has filed Form No.68 as per sub-section (1) of section 270AA of the Act, however, the Assessing Officer has not passed any order accepting or rejecting such application which he was supposed to pass as per provisions of sub-section (4) of section 270AA of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com 10 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 13. We find an identical issue had come up before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nirman Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC (supra). We find the Hon’ble High Court relying on various decisions has directed the Revenue to grant immunity u/s 270AA of the Act to the assessee by observing as under: “4 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is only in cases where proceedings for levy of penalty have been initiated on account of alleged misreporting of income that an assessee is prohibited from applying and availing the benefit of immunity from penalty and prosecution under Section 270AA. 5. In fact, the statutory scheme for grant of immunity is based on satisfaction of three fundamental conditions, namely, (i) payment of tax demand; (ii) non- institution of appeal, and (iii) initiation of penalty on account of underreporting of income and not on account of misreporting of Income. 6. This Court is also of the view that the petitioner cannot be prejudiced by the inaction of the Assessing Officer in passing an order under Section 270AA of the Act within the statutory time limit as it is settled law that no prejudice can be caused to any assessee on account of delay/default on the part of the Revenue. 7. In the present case, the petitioner has satisfied the aforesaid conditions, inasmuch as, (i) the tax has been paid on the additions, (ii) appeal has undisputedly not been filed; and (iii) penalty (as would be evident from the penalty notice) has been initiated on account of \"under-reporting\" of income. 8. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the petitioner acquired a right to be granted immunity under Section 270AA of the Act. In fact, this Court, in Schneider Electric South East Asia (HQ) Pte Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 3(1)(2), New Delhi and Ors., WP(C) 5111/2022, has held, \"This Court is further of the view that the impugned action of Respondent No. 1 is contrary to the avowed Legislative intent of Section 270AA of the Act to encourage/incentivize a taxpayer to (i) fast-track settlement of issue, (ii) recover tax demand, and (iii) reduce protracted litigation\". 9. Consequently, the impugned order under Section 270A of the Act is set aside and the respondent is directed to grant immunity under Section 270AA of the Act to the petitioner. 10. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition along with pending applications stands disposed of.” Printed from counselvise.com 11 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 14. We find, following the above decision the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ultimate INfratech Pvt. Ltd. Vs. NFAC & Anr. (supra), has also taken the similar view. The various other decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in the paper book also supports his case to the above proposition. Since the assessee in the instant case has filed the requisite Form No.68 before the Assessing Officer on 29.02.2024 but the Assessing Officer has failed to pass any order either accepting or rejecting such an application which he was supposed to do as per provisions of sub-section (4) of section 270AA of the Act, therefore, respectfully following the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court cited (supra), we direct the Assessing Officer to grant immunity from penalty to the assessee. Accordingly the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC is set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to cancel the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed. 15. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 28th November, 2025 GCVSR Printed from counselvise.com 12 ITA No.1790/PUN/2025 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 27.11.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 27.11.2025 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "