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.

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 71clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi892Mumbai692Ahmedabad266Jaipur227Bangalore200Chennai145Karnataka128Kolkata121Pune93Chandigarh78Indore67Hyderabad63Surat60Raipur54Allahabad48Cochin38Calcutta36Nagpur31Amritsar30Lucknow26Visakhapatnam25Guwahati15Dehradun14Rajkot13Varanasi8Ranchi7Cuttack6Patna5Panaji4Agra3SC3Telangana3Jabalpur2Jodhpur2Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)6Section 2(22)(e)5Addition to Income3Section 682

BIPIN BABU AGRAWAL,MATHURA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 502/AGR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Apr 2026AY 2014-15
Section 132(1)Section 143Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 292

71,141/- consequent upon the search and seizure action u/s 132(1) of the Act dated 19.07.2018 carried out in the R S Bullion and jewellers group of cases including the premises of assessee. The quantum appeal filed against the impugned order dated 30.09.2021 was dismissed by the ld CIT(A), vide order dated 28.06.2022 passed in appeal

HARSH SALUJA,MATHURA vs. ITO 3(2), MATHURA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 165/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed
ITAT Agra
01 Dec 2017
AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 251(2)Section 44ASection 68

71,764/- as on 17.03.2011, thus in any view the addition made is grossly arbitrary, highly unjust, perverse, wrong, illegal & against the peculiar facts of the case and bad in law. 1.3 BECAUSE in any view, the other income of Rs.20,000/- shown in the Return of Income from these transaction in union Bank of India SB A/c No.2969 have

A.C.I.T.-4(1), AGRA vs. M/S ROGER INDUSTRIES LTD., AGRA

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 266/AGR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 Oct 2018AY 2008-09
Section 14ASection 2Section 2(22)(e)

u/s 2(22)(e). To which the assessee replied that since the assessee company has purchased shoes from M/S Euro Safety Footwear (P) Ltd., these are commercial transactions and the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) are not attracted. The assessee believed that the reply would be convincing and did not file any other evidence at that point of time