ITA No.6613/Mum/2026

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Vivek Trivedi, employed as a ship captain, did not furnish his income return within the prescribed time. A notice under section 148 was issued, and the assessee subsequently furnished his return on 27.05.2024, declaring total income of ₹31,57,840. The Assessing Officer accepted the income without any variation. However, a penalty of ₹3,95,123 was levied under section 270A for alleged under-reporting of income. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. The assessee appealed against the penalty, arguing that the entire salary income had already suffered deduction of tax at source and stood reported to the Income-tax Department by the employer. The Tribunal held that the penalty was not justified as the assessee's explanation was found to be bona fide and the amount in question fell within the exclusion enacted in section 270A(6)(a).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the penalty levied under section 270A for alleged under-reporting of income was justified.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• ITA No.6623/Mum/2026 Vivek Trivedi Vs. ACIT, Circle 42(3)(1), Mumbai

  Mumbai bench

• Nikhil Rajpal vs ITO

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2019-20Allowed

• Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Alwar vs. Shri Man Mohan Krishna

  Jaipur bench

• Blupex Vinimoy Private Ltd. Vs ITO, Ward-14(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2020-21Allowed

• Bishamber Dayal vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi benchAY 2019-20Allowed

• Sri Saradha Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. The DCIT

  Chennai bench