BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

29 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 50clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,860Mumbai1,627Ahmedabad493Jaipur377Bangalore331Kolkata254Pune225Hyderabad214Indore211Chennai201Chandigarh153Karnataka138Raipur134Surat103Rajkot99Amritsar76Visakhapatnam60Nagpur59Allahabad50Lucknow44Cochin37Cuttack36Calcutta35Agra29Dehradun23Guwahati18Kerala14Jodhpur12Varanasi11Panaji11Jabalpur11Patna10SC8Telangana5Ranchi5Rajasthan4Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income27Section 14825Section 271(1)(c)21Section 10(38)20Section 14717Disallowance16Penalty15Deduction11Section 271(1)(b)10

SMT. SARLA DEVI,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 1(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 70/AGR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

section 271(l)(c). Ld. CIT(A) has legally erred in confirming the penalty ignoring the fact that the Assessing Officer has not specifically mentioned whether Explanation 1 (A) is applicable or Explanation 1(B). Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed by simply referring to Explanation 1. 6. Because even otherwise neither Explanation 1(A) is applicable

MS/ BHOLE BABA MILK FOOD INDUSTRIES,AGRA vs. THE A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-4(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

Section 27110
Section 27410
Reassessment10
ITA 378/AGR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Mar 2018AY 2008-09
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 44A

u/s 274; she has availed that opportunity by participating; deficiency if any is made good relying on section 292B/292BB; AO has specified in the assessment order that he is initiating penalty for concealing the income and placed reliance I.T.A No. 378/Agra/2014 21 to Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Kaushalya and others

SH. SACHIN ARORA,MATHURA vs. I.T.O.-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 118/AGR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

section 271(l)(c) for levy of penalty and consequently the penalty imposed, both would be unsustainable and cannot stand in the eye of law." ‘Muninaga Reddy’ ‘Manjunatha’(supra), 49. Thus, (supra), following unambiguously lays down that the notice u/s 274 must specifically state the ground for which penalty is being levied, i.e., whether for concealment of income

ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD,JHANSI vs. DCIT -2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed

ITA 193/AGR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra07 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 44A

u/s 274; she has availed that opportunity by participating; deficiency if any is made good relying on section 292B/292BB; AO has specified in the assessment order that he is initiating penalty for concealing the income and placed reliance to Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Kaushalya and others (216 ITR 660) and submitted that

SH. GIRRAJ KISHORE AGARWAL, HUF,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr. D.R
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

50,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. 3. Agreeing with the view of the Assessing Officer, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty order, inter alia observing as under: “5.1 I have gone through the penalty order submissions of the assessee and legal position in this regard Karnataka High Court recently

M/S VERMA SERVICE STATION,FIROZABAD vs. D.C.I.T., RANGE-5, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 349/AGR/2018[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Sept 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

u/s 271(1)(C). In this case assessee has made a claim which is wholly without any basis and the explanation furnished to explain the cash deposits in terms of advance for sale of land is also found to be wrong as assessee could not file any details of land that was sold or any agreement to sell

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 200/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

penalty proceedings U/S 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act, 1961. That the appellate order dated 30th March, 2016 passed by the 7. learned CIT(A)-I, Agra is against the law and facts of the assessee’s case. The appellant also seeks permission to modify and/or adduce any other ground/grounds of appeal as the circumstances of the case might require

MR. PRAMOD KUMAR KHANDELWAL,AGRA vs. DY.C.I.T.-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed in the terms indicated

ITA 201/AGR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 145Section 271(1)Section 44A

penalty proceedings U/S 271(1)(c) of I.T. Act, 1961. That the appellate order dated 30th March, 2016 passed by the 7. learned CIT(A)-I, Agra is against the law and facts of the assessee’s case. The appellant also seeks permission to modify and/or adduce any other ground/grounds of appeal as the circumstances of the case might require

SH. VISHNU KANT,,AGRA vs. ITO.-2(1)(5),, AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 123/AGR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 44Section 44A

50,000/- by applying provisions of section 44AD of 'the Act', which comes to 20% of the sales declared. It, therefore, clearly shows that the assessee has suppressed the actual sales and net profit there-on. Had the Return not been 2 picked up for scrutiny, the actual sales made by the assessee could not have been brought on record

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 391/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 389/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 390/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 368/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 367/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 369/AGR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh**

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

VINOD KUMAR GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), JHANSI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 388/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(b)Section 69A

Section 144B of the Act on 26.03.2022 wherein, loss from house property of Rs. 52,567/- was disallowed apart from making addition on account of unexplained money u/s 69A in respect of credits in the bank account in the sum of Rs. 28,20,500 and denying deduction under Chapter VIA to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/-. These

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD 3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 16/AGR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

50%, i.e., the relief given by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee’s income from Rasleela would come to Rs.1,75,204/-. 9. It is in support of the above submissions, that the assessee seeks to place on record a copy of sale deed dated 29.12.2007 concerning the transaction of sale of immovable property and a copy of the assessment

SHRI SWAMI RAM SWAROOP SHARMA,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD-3(4), MATHURA

In the result, both the appeals are treated as allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 146/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenakapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Revenue) (Assessee) Kapil Sharma, Executor Of The Vs..Ito,3(4), Estate Of Late (Shri) Ram Swaroop Mathura. Sharma, Gandhi Marg, Vrindavan, Mathura. C/O R.M. Mehta S-125, Panchsheel Park (First Floor), New Delhi Pan:Anhps1936P (Assessee) (Revenue)

50%, i.e., the relief given by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee’s income from Rasleela would come to Rs.1,75,204/-. 9. It is in support of the above submissions, that the assessee seeks to place on record a copy of sale deed dated 29.12.2007 concerning the transaction of sale of immovable property and a copy of the assessment

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2,, AGRA vs. M/S SAKSHI TAIRI & CHHAYA BATTAD, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)© of the I.T. Act, 1961 are initiated for filing inaccurate particulars of income.” 10. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 10.02.2014 has allowed the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 124/Agr/2014 and have deleted the addition in respect of ground no.1, the paragraphs

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-2, GWALIOR vs. M/S SHYAM SUNDER & MANISH TAORI, MORENA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 124/AGR/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 10(38)Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)© of the I.T. Act, 1961 are initiated for filing inaccurate particulars of income.” 10. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 10.02.2014 has allowed the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 124/Agr/2014 and have deleted the addition in respect of ground no.1, the paragraphs