
The ITAT Ahmedabad cancelled a ₹2.31 lakh penalty on a political donation deduction, ruling that a disallowed claim does not automatically amount to misreporting under Section 270A. The order cites Delhi High Court precedent requiring specific grounds for misreporting penalties.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Ahmedabad has thrown out a ₹2.31 lakh penalty against a taxpayer who claimed a ₹3.71 lakh deduction for a political donation under Section 80GGC of the Income-tax Act. The tribunal ruled that simply disallowing a deduction does not count as under-reporting or misreporting of income, especially when the tax department failed to specify which limb of the penalty provision it was invoking.
The case involves Niket Maheshbhai Shah for assessment year 2019-20. Shah claimed a deduction for a donation made through a bank account to the Manav Adhikar National Party. He had a certificate from the party to back the claim.
The assessment was reopened under Section 147 after a search involving the political party and statements from its officials. The Assessing Officer disallowed Shah's Section 80GGC claim. Shah did not contest the disallowance. He paid the resulting tax demand and applied for immunity under Section 270AA, which the officer rejected on grounds that the income was misreported.
The officer then slapped a penalty of ₹2,31,504 under Section 270A at 200% of the tax, branding the case as under-reporting from misreporting. The National Faceless Appeal Centre upheld that penalty.
Shah argued before the tribunal that he had used a banking channel and had claimed the deduction in good faith. Accepting the disallowance did not mean he deliberately misreported his income, he said.
The tribunal found that the officer had examined the deduction claim. A deduction disallowed on examination cannot, by itself, be cast as misreporting or under-reporting, the order said. More to the point, the penalty order did not identify which specific clause of Section 270A(9) defined the misreporting. The tribunal cited the Delhi High Court's 2022 ruling in Prem Brothers Infrastructure LLP, which held that using the word "misreporting" without specifying the applicable limb and explaining how Section 270A(9) applied cannot support a penalty.
The tribunal also referred to the Rajasthan High Court's decision in G R Infraprojects, which dealt with similar issues of under-reporting versus misreporting under Section 270A.
"Therefore, the penalty does not sustain," the Ahmedabad bench held, quashing the ₹2.31 lakh penalty.
The ruling does not mean the tribunal approved Shah's original deduction claim. The dispute covered only the penalty. Shah had already accepted the disallowance and paid the tax.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.