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.

777 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Disallowanceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,244Delhi2,629Ahmedabad777Bangalore465Jaipur448Kolkata415Pune364Chennai282Indore244Hyderabad242Surat214Chandigarh193Raipur96Rajkot86Amritsar79Nagpur69Lucknow55Visakhapatnam53Cochin49Allahabad47Agra40Cuttack37Calcutta36Ranchi32Jodhpur18Dehradun18Panaji17Jabalpur16Guwahati13Karnataka12Varanasi12Patna7SC4Telangana4Rajasthan2Gauhati1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)102Penalty67Disallowance64Section 143(3)61Addition to Income57Section 14A53Section 3733Section 14832Section 143(2)26

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

Showing 1–20 of 777 · Page 1 of 39

...
Deduction26
Limitation/Time-bar26
Section 14725

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

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

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

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

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

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

disallowance of Rs.4,22,77,759/- u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of the income -tax Rule, 1962 and penalty proceedings u/s. 271

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

disallowance of Rs.4,22,77,759/- u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of the income -tax Rule, 1962 and penalty proceedings u/s. 271

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1863/AHD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c). The assessee has not furnished any inaccurate particulars of income either in the Return of Income or during the appellate proceedings and deductions claimed u/s. 35E and depreciation u/s. 32 are claimed are also well in accordance with law. The disallowance

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1861/AHD/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c). The assessee has not furnished any inaccurate particulars of income either in the Return of Income or during the appellate proceedings and deductions claimed u/s. 35E and depreciation u/s. 32 are claimed are also well in accordance with law. The disallowance

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1860/AHD/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2003-04
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c). The assessee has not furnished any inaccurate particulars of income either in the Return of Income or during the appellate proceedings and deductions claimed u/s. 35E and depreciation u/s. 32 are claimed are also well in accordance with law. The disallowance

GUJARAT POWER CORPORATION LIMITED-GPCL,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1862/AHD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 32Section 35ESection 37

penalty can be levied u/s. 271(1)(c). The assessee has not furnished any inaccurate particulars of income either in the Return of Income or during the appellate proceedings and deductions claimed u/s. 35E and depreciation u/s. 32 are claimed are also well in accordance with law. The disallowance

RAMCHAND BHULCHAND RAJAI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-1, , BHAVNAGAR

ITA 167/AHD/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 167/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 बनाम बनाम बनाम बनाम Ramchand Bhulchand Rajai, The Deputy Commissioner C/O. Jayesh Tyres, Vs. Of Income-Tax, Opp. Railway Station, Circle-1, Bhavnagar Bhavnagar-364001 Pan : Abmpr 4841 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri B.R. Popat, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 22/04/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri B.R. Popat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr DR
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)

271(1)(c) of the Act, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 2. The penalty in the present case was levied on concealment/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, arising from the following disallowances made by the Assessing Officer which were confirmed upto the ITAT:- Ramchand Bhulchand Rajai Vs. DCIT AY : 2009-10 2 (i) Disallowance u/s

DEVENDRA NARENDRABHAI THAKKER,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 762/AHD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 762/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Devendra Narendrabhai Acit, बनाम/ Thakker, Cir – 5(2), Vs. C/O Maffick Logistics, 228, Ahmedabad. Akshar Arcade, Opp. Memnagar Fire Station, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-14 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abfpt 6354 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Jyotish M. Shah, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr.D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Jyotish M. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271Section 274Section 54ESection 54G

disallowing the deduction u/s 54G of the Act. In compliance to it, the assessee submitted that he has already paid taxes along with interest for the wrong claim of deduction u/s 54G of the Act. It was also claimed that deduction u/s 54G for Rs.74,65,134/- was claimed inadvertently on the misinterpretation of the provisions of law. Accordingly

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ATUL LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 851/AHD/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Apr 2022AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushilkumar Madhuk, CIT-D.R
Section 27Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80SSection 92Section 92C

disallowance u/s 80-IA of the Act in quantum appeal. The Ld. Assessing Officer also imposed penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act in respect

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMACEUTICALS INDUSTRIES LIMITED,, VADODARA

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

ITA 921/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 271(1)(c)

u/s 10B 504 12 Disallowances of repair expenses 1,017,500 13 Disallowances of leave encashment 3,998,673 14 Disallowances under section 14A 36,066,172 2.2 The amount of penalty was levied by the AO under section 271

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

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

ITA 928/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 271(1)(c)

u/s 10B 504 12 Disallowances of repair expenses 1,017,500 13 Disallowances of leave encashment 3,998,673 14 Disallowances under section 14A 36,066,172 2.2 The amount of penalty was levied by the AO under section 271

THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(3),, BARODA vs. M/S. FINE LINE CIRCUIT COMPANY,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1920/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2018AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sanket Bakshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R
Section 10BSection 10B(2)Section 10B(3)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)

disallowance of deduction u/s 10B of the Act on account of deemed export u/s 10B in favour of the assessee in A.Y. 2004-05 vide decision dated 18.06.2010 in CAB/I I-605/08- ' 09. The Assessing Officer has himself dropped the penalty u/s 271

M/S. VIMALACHAL PRINT & PACK PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(2),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1258/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rameshkumar L Sadhu, S.R
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43

U/s 271(1)(c) on disallowance of claim requires to be deleted. 4. That the Appellant has suo moto declared the disallowances of Foreign exchange fluctuation loss on capital assets during the course of assessment proceedings which does not amounts to concealment or inaccurate particulars of Income, therefore the penalty

I- SERVE SYSTEM PVT. LTD.,,GANDHINAGAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE,, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1044/AHD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Shukla, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

u/s. 271(1)(c) was reduced to Rs.8,26,709/-. Still aggrieved, the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act has been imposed in the case of the assessee on the addition made on account of disallowance