Shri Manish Manohardas Asrani Vs. INT TAX WARD 1(1)(1)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shri Manish Manohardas Asrani, filed his return of income on 07.08.2019 declaring a total income of Rs.26,35,970/-. After receiving a notice under section 139(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, he filed another return on 29.11.2011 with the same income. His case was selected for scrutiny assessment, and a draft assessment order was passed on 22.09.2021. The assessee disputed the addition by the Assessing Officer (AO) but did not attach any objection filed before the Dispute Resolution Panel. The AO finalized the draft order, considering the time limit for filing objections had passed. The AO noticed a discrepancy between the salary reported in the ITR and the TDS details, asking for Form 16 and bank statements. The assessee claimed that he inadvertently reported the tax deducted at source instead of the gross salary. The AO added Rs.62,93,742/- to the assessee's income under 'salaries' and levied a penalty of Rs.44,90,048/- for underreporting income. The assessee appealed against the penalty, arguing that the AO lacked jurisdiction and that the penalty notice was invalid.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Assessing Officer had the jurisdiction to levy the penalty?
• 2. Whether the penalty notice issued under section 274 r.w.s 270A of the Act was valid?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Jagdish Chandra Sharma vs The ITO, Ward-1, Sikar

  Jaipur bench

• Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi Vs. Goverdhan Transport Company Pvt. Ltd

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• General Reinsurance Corporation Vs ACIT (International Taxation)

• Udai Parnami vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur

  Jaipur bench

• Mali Ram Bajiya vs ITO, Ward-5(1), Jaipur

  Jaipur bench

• SANDEEP DUGGAL VS. ASSESSMENT UNIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed