BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

181 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai835Delhi757Jaipur238Ahmedabad181Bangalore170Chennai157Pune140Raipur118Indore113Hyderabad111Kolkata88Chandigarh78Nagpur62Surat56Rajkot55Amritsar55Lucknow37Allahabad35Cochin31Visakhapatnam26Agra20Ranchi14Patna13Cuttack12Jabalpur10Panaji10Guwahati9Jodhpur8Varanasi8Dehradun5

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)99Section 143(3)74Addition to Income72Section 14A51Penalty51Disallowance50Deduction44Section 3738Section 25029

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1750/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Deduction of remuneration received from partnership firm under section 115JB 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the penalty on disallowance of remuneration received from partnership firms, M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries ('SPI') and Sun Pharma Sikkim ('SPS'). 3.2 The Id. CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the penalty u/s. 271

Showing 1–20 of 181 · Page 1 of 10

...
Section 14822
Double Taxation/DTAA21
Section 54F19

SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,VADODARA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BARODA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1741/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri T.R.Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Deduction of remuneration received from partnership firm under section 115JB 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the penalty on disallowance of remuneration received from partnership firms, M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries ('SPI') and Sun Pharma Sikkim ('SPS'). 3.2 The Id. CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the penalty u/s. 271

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1124/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

deduction of Rs.93,04,00,000/-, made by the assessee on account of revision of lease operating expense. The A.O had also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1122/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

deduction of Rs.93,04,00,000/-, made by the assessee on account of revision of lease operating expense. The A.O had also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1121/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

deduction of Rs.93,04,00,000/-, made by the assessee on account of revision of lease operating expense. The A.O had also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1123/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

deduction of Rs.93,04,00,000/-, made by the assessee on account of revision of lease operating expense. The A.O had also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271

AXIS BANK LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1125/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

deduction of Rs.93,04,00,000/-, made by the assessee on account of revision of lease operating expense. The A.O had also initiated penalty proceeding u/s 271

CITIZEN CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,VADODARA vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI JURIDICTIONAL AO THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 889/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

deduction u/s. 80P of Rs. 25,39,105/. Penalty proceedings for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) were initiated

CITIZEN CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,VADODARA vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE JURISDICTIONAL AO THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 891/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

deduction u/s. 80P of Rs. 25,39,105/. Penalty proceedings for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) were initiated

CITIZEN CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,VADODARA vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE JURISDICTIONAL AO THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 890/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

deduction u/s. 80P of Rs. 25,39,105/. Penalty proceedings for levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) were initiated

THE ACIT(E),CIRCLE-2 , AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 379/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section 2(15) of the Act and (ii) Revenue receipts not offered for taxation under the disguise of it being capital receipt. 7. In response the Assessee made a detailed reply stating that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 386/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section 2(15) of the Act and (ii) Revenue receipts not offered for taxation under the disguise of it being capital receipt. 7. In response the Assessee made a detailed reply stating that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 389/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section 2(15) of the Act and (ii) Revenue receipts not offered for taxation under the disguise of it being capital receipt. 7. In response the Assessee made a detailed reply stating that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only

ACIT(E), CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. VADODARA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 388/AHD/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 12ASection 22Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 11 and 12 by invoking the provision of section 2(15) of the Act and (ii) Revenue receipts not offered for taxation under the disguise of it being capital receipt. 7. In response the Assessee made a detailed reply stating that as per the provisions of Section 271[1][c] of the Act penalty can be levied only

AKAR LAMINATORS LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 600/AHD/2023[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: This Tribunal & The Case Was Set-Aside Vide Order Dated 01.08.2014 In Ita No. 858 & 927/Ahd/2005 & Accordingly Assessment Was Finalized U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act & The Total Loss Was Determined At (-) Rs.22,47,26,293/- After Making Following Additions/Disallowances:

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

deductible u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act as business expenditure Therefore AO has disallowed of interest expenses on investment amounting to Rs. 2,25,73,549/- The assessee has not filed an appeal on this issue Penalty proceedings u/s 271

MANAS KUMAR DAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1278/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Tulsian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250

271(l)(c) by stating that the assessee has concealed ITA Nos. 1277&1278/Ahd/2024 Manas Kumar Das vs. ITO Asst. Year –2011-12 - 5– the particulars of income which is not valid notice as the assessee has shown the same in his return filed under section 148 of the Act. Penalty Proceeding U/s 271F: 20) AO has initiated the penalty

MANAS KUMAR DAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1277/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Tulsian, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250

271(l)(c) by stating that the assessee has concealed ITA Nos. 1277&1278/Ahd/2024 Manas Kumar Das vs. ITO Asst. Year –2011-12 - 5– the particulars of income which is not valid notice as the assessee has shown the same in his return filed under section 148 of the Act. Penalty Proceeding U/s 271F: 20) AO has initiated the penalty

TEJAS GHANSHYAMBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 628/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 251Section 254Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 438Section 54ESection 54F

deductions u/s. 54EC and u/s. 54F and demanded tax thereon. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal against that assessment order which was partly allowed. It is thereafter the Assessing Officer proceeded with the penalty proceedings for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and levied minimum penalty of Rs.1,70,414/- u/s. 271

CHARTERED SPEED LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2286/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) and which is not the clear intendment of the legislature by observing as follows: “…10. It was tried to be suggested that Section 14A of the Act specifically excluded the deductions

MADHU SILICA PVT. LTD.,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal being ITA No

ITA 701/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleita Nos. 701 & 702/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 32A

deduction u/s. 32AC of Rs. 16,08,70,789/- and disallowance u/s. 14A of Rs. 32,11,000/-. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271