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.

67 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Depreciationclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai334Delhi287Ahmedabad67Chennai59Jaipur54Raipur48Bangalore46Indore27Hyderabad27Pune26Chandigarh22Kolkata20Amritsar15Lucknow13Surat13Visakhapatnam12Jodhpur7Rajkot7Guwahati5Ranchi5Allahabad3Patna3Cuttack2Nagpur2Cochin2Jabalpur2Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)59Addition to Income55Section 14A48Section 271(1)(c)45Disallowance44Depreciation41Penalty33Section 115J28Business Income17

SCHAEFFLER INDIA LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS INA BEARING INDIA PVT. LTD.),VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CICLE-1(1)(2) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1872/AHD/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Bhavin Marfatia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 92C

u/s 271(l)(c) of Rs. 2,76,33,870.\n9. The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of the\nlearned AO in levying penalty despite the fact that the Appellant has not furnished\ninaccurate particulars of income either in return of income or during the course of\nassessment proceedings.\n10. The learned

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4

Section 143(2)16
Section 153A16
Section 139(1)13

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

penalty order passed under section 271[1][C] of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2001-02. I.T.A No. 600/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2001-02 Page No 2 Akar Laminators Ltd. vs. DCIT 2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a company engaged in the manufacturing

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2 1 1 , VADODARA, VADODARA vs. UNIMED TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, PANCHMAHAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 279/AHD/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 43A

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act by observing as follows: “6.3 In this case, the details of foreign exchange loss were not furnished in the return of income. In the tax audit report, it was shown as increase in liability of the loan. The loss was not debited in Schedule K of the audited accounts. The particulars of expenditure

M/S. WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, BARODA

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

ITA 1580/AHD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri MK Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri SudhankarVerma, Sr. D.R
Section 41(1)

u/s 271(1)(c). 38. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 39. The learned AR before us submitted that the assessee has neither furnished inaccurate particulars of income nor concealed the particulars of income. Therefore, there cannot be levied any penalty under the provisions of section 271

WORLD TRADE IMPEX LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

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

ITA 639/AHD/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri MK Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri SudhankarVerma, Sr. D.R
Section 41(1)

u/s 271(1)(c). 38. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 39. The learned AR before us submitted that the assessee has neither furnished inaccurate particulars of income nor concealed the particulars of income. Therefore, there cannot be levied any penalty under the provisions of section 271

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

271(1)(C) the penalty was imposed. The ld. A.R. further submitted that the assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 16,08,70,789/- u/s 32AC while filing the return of income. One of the items was pollution control equipments of Rs. 10,80,64,368/- which are eligible for depreciation

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

In the result, appeal being ITA No

ITA 702/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

271(1)(C) the penalty was imposed. The ld. A.R. further submitted that the assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 16,08,70,789/- u/s 32AC while filing the return of income. One of the items was pollution control equipments of Rs. 10,80,64,368/- which are eligible for depreciation

N K PROTEINS PVT. LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is directed to be deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/AHD/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, CIT-D.R
Section 194HSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

penalty imposed on the assessee u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has no legs to stand on and is liable to be deleted. 4. It would be useful to reproduce the relevant extracts of the ruling for ready reference. We observe that ITAT in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2011-12 vide order dated

SWAMINARAYAN CO.OP.BANK LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1),, BARODA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1411/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1411/Ahd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Swaminarayan Co-Op. Bank Ltd. The Acit बना 1, Ashok Chambers Circle-3(1) Opp. Pathak Gate Police Station Ahmedabad म/ Madanzampa Road V/S. Vadodara 390 001 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaas 1932 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) …… "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Kanabar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 9/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 08/07/2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Dated 27/02/2019 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11. Swaminarayan Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Vs. Acit Asst. Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Kanabar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Natha Bhalekar, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 35A

penalty proceedings u/s 271(10(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars and concealment of income. 2.3. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) against the order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act, who confirmed the disallowance of set off against the brought forward losses. The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal

M/S. FLOURISH PUREFOODS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-2(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 30/AHD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. No.518/Ahd/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Flourish Purefoods Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income 11-12, Ecs House, Garden View, Tax, Nr. Global Hospital, Bodakdev, Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad-380054 Ahmedabad [Pan No.Aadcv2683B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. D.R
Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 68

depreciation u/s 32 of the Act and the second appeal is against the penalty confirmed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act relating

SUMANGAL GLASS PVT. LTD.,KUTCH vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is hereby allowed

ITA 676/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 676/Ahd/2023 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Sumangal Glass Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T, Plot No.617/1-618-620, Vs. Circle-4(1)(1), Nh-8A, Po. Samakhiyari (Piprapati), Ahmedabad Bhachau Taluka, Samakhiyari-370150. Pan: Aaics6992G

For Appellant: Shri Manish J Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)

depreciation therein. However, such loss on the sale of machinery was inadvertently not added back in the computation of income. Thus, there was inadvertent error and therefore the penalty can be levied u/s 271

METRO HERITAGE PVT.LTD.,VADODARA vs. DY.CIT., CIRCLE-2(1)(2), VADODARA

The appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 616/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.616/Ahd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Metro Heritage Pvt.Ltd. The Dy.Cit 30-A Vishwas Colony बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(2) Beside Kesha Hospital Vadodara V/S. Alkapuri Vadodara – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaecm 2161 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ….. ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 01/08/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee As Against The Order Dated 21/06/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)” In Short] Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 19/12/2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. Metro Heritage Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit Asst. Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(b)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act was also passed by the AO. The AO observed that the assessee had submitted the details called for through online facility provided under E-proceedings. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee has not disclosed interest income of Rs.5,47,553/-. The AO asked to furnish

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NOW CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,, BARODA

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

ITA 3164/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

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

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 37Section 43(1)

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. 7.0. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in confirming the charging of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.0 The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal

GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LTD.,BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

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

ITA 3124/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

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

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 28Section 37Section 43(1)

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. 7.0. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in confirming the charging of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 8.0 The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 281/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 92C

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Each of the above ground is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal preferred by the Appellant. Additional Ground of Appeal The Appellant humbly submits that the following additional grounds of appeal which is purely of legal nature may kindly be admitted. In law and in the facts

INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 222/AHD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vejalpur Vs Corporate House Ahmedabad. S.G. Highway Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L Asstt.Year : 2015-16 M/S.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Corporate House Vs Vejalpur S.G. Highway Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Bridge, Thaltej Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Aaaci 5120 L (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Advocae & Shri Parin Shah, Ar : Shri Ragnesh Das, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/05/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 92C

penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. Each of the above ground is independent and without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal preferred by the Appellant. Additional Ground of Appeal The Appellant humbly submits that the following additional grounds of appeal which is purely of legal nature may kindly be admitted. In law and in the facts

MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITED,VADODARA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 372/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation is also set aside to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and allow the claim in accordance with the provisions of amended law. 9. In the result, Ground No. 3 raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 10. Ground No. 4 is Initiation of penalty u/s. 271

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD., VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 369/AHD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation is also set aside to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and allow the claim in accordance with the provisions of amended law. 9. In the result, Ground No. 3 raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 10. Ground No. 4 is Initiation of penalty u/s. 271

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD., VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 368/AHD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation is also set aside to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and allow the claim in accordance with the provisions of amended law. 9. In the result, Ground No. 3 raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 10. Ground No. 4 is Initiation of penalty u/s. 271

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA vs. MADHYA GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD., VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 367/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)

depreciation is also set aside to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and allow the claim in accordance with the provisions of amended law. 9. In the result, Ground No. 3 raised by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 10. Ground No. 4 is Initiation of penalty u/s. 271