Section 270AA Immunity Rejection Invalid Without Penalty Decision | HC
- Blog|News|Income Tax|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 20 April, 2026
Latest from Taxmann
Case Details: IBS Software (P.) Ltd. vs. Union of India - [2026] 185 taxmann.com 351 (Kerala)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Devan Ramachandran & Basant Balaji, JJ.
-
Raja Kannan, Joson Manavalan, K. John Mathai, Kuryan Thomas, M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar, Paulose C. Abraham, Advs. & E.K. Nandakumar, Sr. Adv. for the Petitioner.
-
P.G. Jayashankar, G. Keerthivas, Advs. & Navaneeth N. Nath, CGC for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee filed an application seeking immunity from the penalty proceedings under section 270A. However, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) rejected the application on the grounds that the assessee’s misreporting of income has been proved.
The matter reached the Kerala High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the ACIT had issued a notice under section 270A, against which the assessee filed objections. The assessee contended that it had committed no error or wrongdoing, including misrepresentation, misreporting, or underreporting of income.
Admittedly, the assessee’s objections had not been considered yet. However, the ACIT issued a notice declining to grant immunity from the penalty proceedings. The Court held that the ACIT had acted prematurely in considering the application in question. It is only after the Competent Authority decides to impose the penalty that the decision on immunity from it can be considered.
If the Authority, after considering the objections, decides not to impose a penalty, it would not be necessary to issue an order on the application seeking immunity from the penalty. The Authority concerned had not yet decided to impose the penalty, and such a decision would depend on the consideration of the assessee’s objections.
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the order and directed the ACIT to consider the objections in its proper perspective, after affording necessary opportunities to the assessee.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Judgement of Kerala High Court IN WP(C) NO.42692 OF 2022 dated 19-12-2023 [Para 12] Set aside
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied
Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India
To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com
CA | CS | CMA
