← All Phrases

“levy of penalty”

PenaltySection 271Section 2715,057 judgments

The decision most relied on for levy of penalty is CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory (359 ITR 565), cited in 2,590 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on levy of penalty

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

Rashmikant Kundalia v. Union of India
54 Taxmann.com 200 · 2015 · High Court
702
citing judgments

Section 234E, levying late fees for delayed filing of TDS statements under section 200(3), is constitutionally valid and constitutes a compensatory fee, not a punitive penalty. Before treating any person as an assessee-in-default, an opportunity of being heard must be provided.

Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT
291 ITR 519 · 2007 · Supreme Court
565
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to strike out the inapplicable limb (concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars) from the standard proforma, indicating non-application of mind. The initial burden of proving concealment or inaccurate particulars rests on the Revenue.

CIT v. Kaushalya
216 ITR 660 · 1995 · High Court
511
citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is not invalidated by the Assessing Officer's failure to strike off irrelevant portions in the show cause notice, provided the assessee understood the exact charge and suffered no prejudice, indicating an application of mind by the AO.

CIT v. Manu Engg
122 ITR 306 · 1980 · High Court
505
citing judgments

When levying a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer must clearly specify whether it is for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars. An ambiguous notice or order using "and/or" for these limbs, or a standard proforma without striking irrelevant clauses, indicates non-application of mind and renders the penalty unsustainable.

Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa
83 ITR 26 · 1972 · Supreme Court
502
citing judgments

An order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation results from quasi-criminal proceedings. Penalty is not ordinarily imposed unless the party acted deliberately in defiance of law, was guilty of contumacious or dishonest conduct, or acted in conscious disregard of their obligation.

Judgments citing levy of penalty

Satish Kumar Jain, Jain Abhushan Bhandar, Ambala vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Ambala, Income Tax Office

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 63/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.63/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.362/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Satish Kumar Jain Ito Ward-4 (Prop. Of M/S Jain Abhushan Bhandar) Ambala, Haryana - 133001 बनाम/ C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates (Ca) Vs. 179 Bank Road, Ambala Cantt. Haryana – 133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acgpk-6011-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl.Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. In These Captioned Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Confirmation Of Quantum Addition As Well As Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aac For Rs.2,77,868/-. First, We Take Up Quantum Appeal Ita No.63/Chandi/2025 Which Arises Out Of An Order

For Appellant: Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl.CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271A

these captioned appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of quantum addition as well as levy of penalty u/s 271AAC for Rs.2,77,868/-. First, we take up quantum appeal ITA No.63/Chandi/2025 which arises out of an order of Learned Commissioner of Income

Satish Kumar Jain, Ambala vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -4 Ambala, Ambala

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 362/CHANDI/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.63/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.362/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Satish Kumar Jain Ito Ward-4 (Prop. Of M/S Jain Abhushan Bhandar) Ambala, Haryana - 133001 बनाम/ C/O Rajiv Goel & Associates (Ca) Vs. 179 Bank Road, Ambala Cantt. Haryana – 133001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acgpk-6011-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Dhruv Goel (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl.Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. In These Captioned Appeals For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Confirmation Of Quantum Addition As Well As Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aac For Rs.2,77,868/-. First, We Take Up Quantum Appeal Ita No.63/Chandi/2025 Which Arises Out Of An Order

For Appellant: Sh. Dhruv Goel (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl.CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271A

these captioned appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, the assessee is aggrieved by confirmation of quantum addition as well as levy of penalty u/s 271AAC for Rs.2,77,868/-. First, we take up quantum appeal ITA No.63/Chandi/2025 which arises out of an order of Learned Commissioner of Income

No.K.779.Guruvareddiyur Primary Agri Co-Op Credit Society, Erode vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1) Erode, Erode

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2779/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2778 & 2779/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 K 779 Guruvareddiyur Primary Agri Co- Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Op. Credit Society, Chennampatti Main Ward 2(1), Road, Guruvareddiyur Post, Bhavani Erode. Taluk, Erode 638 504. [Pan:Aaaag1657Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, Ca (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 11.08.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Towards Quantum Addition As Well As Levy Of Penalty Under Section 270A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 270A

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21 towards quantum addition as well as levy of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. Since, the issues raised in these appeals are similar based ... section 270A of the Act of AY 2020-21, we note that the ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay in filing appeal against levy of penalty under 3 I.T.A. Nos.2778 & 2779/Chny/25 section 270A of the Act, but, however, the delay in filing the appeal against quantum addition has not been

No.K.779.Guruvareddiyur Primary Agri Co-Op Credit Society, Erode vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1) Erode, Erode

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2778/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2778 & 2779/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 K 779 Guruvareddiyur Primary Agri Co- Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Op. Credit Society, Chennampatti Main Ward 2(1), Road, Guruvareddiyur Post, Bhavani Erode. Taluk, Erode 638 504. [Pan:Aaaag1657Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, Ca (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 14.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 11.08.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Towards Quantum Addition As Well As Levy Of Penalty Under Section 270A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 270A

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21 towards quantum addition as well as levy of penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. Since, the issues raised in these appeals are similar based ... section 270A of the Act of AY 2020-21, we note that the ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay in filing appeal against levy of penalty under 3 I.T.A. Nos.2778 & 2779/Chny/25 section 270A of the Act, but, however, the delay in filing the appeal against quantum addition has not been