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.

12 results for “disallowance”+ Section 271Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai61Mumbai61Delhi39Jaipur39Bangalore36Hyderabad20Cochin16Ahmedabad12Lucknow12Raipur9Rajkot7Kolkata6Panaji5Surat4Pune4Indore3Chandigarh3Agra2Visakhapatnam2Amritsar2Cuttack2Jodhpur1Dehradun1Allahabad1Jabalpur1SC1

Key Topics

Section 27I12Addition to Income12Section 271(1)(c)11Section 1448Section 2718Penalty8Section 143(3)7Section 1487Section 2636Section 131

SHRI SANDEEP JAGDISHCHANDRA DAVE,,AHMEDABAD vs. TEH PR. CIT -3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 176/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Dipen Shukhadia, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT D.R
Section 143(3)Section 197Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

disallowed the sum as required under Section 43B of the Act. Sixthly, the PCIT observed that the Audit Report has been finalized and signed after the due date prescribed under Section 44AB of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer ought to have initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271B

6
Exemption6
Deduction6

SHRI GIRISHBHAI M.PATEL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,MEHSANA CIRCLE,, MEHSANA

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

ITA 337/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 337/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2005-2006 Girishbhai M. Patel, A.C.I.T., 4, Regent Park, Vs. Mehsana Circle, Vanza Co-Operative Society, Mehsana. Part-Ii, Near Judges Bungalow, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Abypp8093M

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(22)(e)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Disallowance of insurance amount claimed Rs.40,184/- Rs.24,27,511/- Total Income Rs.32,47,959/- i.e Rs.32,47,960/- 4.1 The AO in the assessment order has recorded to have issued penalty notice under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income and furnished inaccurate particulars of income. Asstt. Year

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2772/AHD/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 22Section 234BSection 271Section 271DSection 27ISection 57Section 68

disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 5,98,616/- the ld. counsel submitted that Assessing Officer has not found any fault with the genuineness of such expenses and therefore under such circumstances no penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Regarding penalty on account of addition of Rs. 2.80 lakhs

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2771/AHD/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 22Section 234BSection 271Section 271DSection 27ISection 57Section 68

disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 5,98,616/- the ld. counsel submitted that Assessing Officer has not found any fault with the genuineness of such expenses and therefore under such circumstances no penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Regarding penalty on account of addition of Rs. 2.80 lakhs

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1031/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 22Section 234BSection 271Section 271DSection 27ISection 57Section 68

disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 5,98,616/- the ld. counsel submitted that Assessing Officer has not found any fault with the genuineness of such expenses and therefore under such circumstances no penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Regarding penalty on account of addition of Rs. 2.80 lakhs

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1032/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 22Section 234BSection 271Section 271DSection 27ISection 57Section 68

disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 5,98,616/- the ld. counsel submitted that Assessing Officer has not found any fault with the genuineness of such expenses and therefore under such circumstances no penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Regarding penalty on account of addition of Rs. 2.80 lakhs

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1030/AHD/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 22Section 234BSection 271Section 271DSection 27ISection 57Section 68

disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 5,98,616/- the ld. counsel submitted that Assessing Officer has not found any fault with the genuineness of such expenses and therefore under such circumstances no penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Regarding penalty on account of addition of Rs. 2.80 lakhs

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1029/AHD/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 22Section 234BSection 271Section 271DSection 27ISection 57Section 68

disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 5,98,616/- the ld. counsel submitted that Assessing Officer has not found any fault with the genuineness of such expenses and therefore under such circumstances no penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Regarding penalty on account of addition of Rs. 2.80 lakhs

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KGN INDUSTRIES LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal field by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 9/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: None
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 148Section 14ASection 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 271FSection 40

disallowance of Rs. 1,86,710/- on account of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus determined the assessed income as Rs. 1,68,10,620/- u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and also charged interest of u/s. 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 1018/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

271B r.w.s. 274 is also initiated separately. 3. Aggrieved against the re-assessment order, the assessee preferred further appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad. Though the assessee raised its Grounds of Appeal only on the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 36,72,913/-. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed Additional Grounds challenging the reopening

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 1014/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

271B r.w.s. 274 is also initiated separately. 3. Aggrieved against the re-assessment order, the assessee preferred further appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad. Though the assessee raised its Grounds of Appeal only on the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 36,72,913/-. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed Additional Grounds challenging the reopening

PATEL AMBALAL LAXMANDAS NI CO.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 1016/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jul 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

271B r.w.s. 274 is also initiated separately. 3. Aggrieved against the re-assessment order, the assessee preferred further appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad. Though the assessee raised its Grounds of Appeal only on the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 36,72,913/-. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed Additional Grounds challenging the reopening