SATISH KUMAR ARORA,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1)(2), AGRA

ITA 510/AGR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 February 2026AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)6 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal upheld the levy of penalty under Section 271AAB, stating that once the element of undisclosed income is accepted, the penalty becomes practically automatic. It noted that Section 271AAB does not provide for immunity based on reasonable cause under Section 273B.

What were the facts?

A search and seizure operation was conducted on the assessee's premises. The assessee did not file a return of income in response to a notice under Section 153A, and assessments were completed ex parte under Section 144. The assessee's family members also declared that all investments found in their names were made by the assessee. The assessee claimed acute depression and memory loss, leading to an inability to explain seized documents or business transactions.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the penalty under Section 271AAB, especially given the assessee's health condition and the estimated nature of the additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 144,Section 271AAB,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH “DB”: AGRA

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sharma, Adv, Shri Manuj Sharma, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20/01/2026Pronounced: 11/02/2026

PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.:

1.

The appeal in ITA No. 510/AGR/2025 for AY 2014-15, arises out of the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kanpur [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 17.09.2025 against the order of the assessment passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 19.08.2016 by the ld Assessing Officer, ACIT, Central Circle, Agra (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the levy of penalty under section 271AAB of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →