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.

13 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai71Chennai47Delhi43Jaipur31Visakhapatnam20Indore17Chandigarh13Ahmedabad13Kolkata12Hyderabad10Bangalore10Agra9Lucknow8Nagpur6Raipur6Rajkot6Pune5Allahabad4Cochin3Jabalpur3Cuttack3Surat1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)30Section 115J12Penalty12Section 15411Section 32A10Addition to Income10Rectification u/s 1549Section 143(3)7Deduction7

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

154 is bad in law 1.1 The initiation of rectification proceedings u/s, ought to be set aside and order ought to be quashed. 2. The penalty levied u/s. 271

Section 2746
Section 14A6
Disallowance6

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

154 is bad in law 1.1 The initiation of rectification proceedings u/s, ought to be set aside and order ought to be quashed. 2. The penalty levied u/s. 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

penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act does not survive. Hence, the ITA No. 701/Ahd/2024 filed by the assessee is allowed. 8. As relates to ITA No. 702/Ahd/2024, the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(A) in respect of rectification order dated 25-04-2019 passed u/s. 154

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

penalty imposed u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act does not survive. Hence, the ITA No. 701/Ahd/2024 filed by the assessee is allowed. 8. As relates to ITA No. 702/Ahd/2024, the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(A) in respect of rectification order dated 25-04-2019 passed u/s. 154

SH. BHAVESHKUMAR GANSHYAM PATEL,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(1), VADODARA, VADODARA, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 951/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2015-16 Shri Bhaveshkumar Ganshyam Patel Ito, Ward-1(2)(1) 446 Patel Faliya Vs. Vadodara. Moti Khadaki, Tb Sanatorium So Vadodara, Gujarat. Pan : Aunpp 1026 C (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Ms.Nikhita Bhamblani, Ca & Shri Virat Bhavsar, Ar : Ms.Urvashi Mandhan, Sr.Dr. Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: /06/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were also initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Thereafter, on receipt of DVO report dated 28.10.2021, the AO passed rectification order u/s 154

SHIVAM PRERNA INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1431/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 271(1)(b)

penalty levied by the Ld. AO U/S 271(1)(b) of the Act of Rs.30,000/- for vague non-compliance of notices issued U/S 142(1) of the Act I.T.A No. 1431/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2016-17 Page No 4 Shivam Prerna Infrabuild vs. ITO 7. The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds

CHAROTAR GAS SAHKARI MANDALI LTD.,ANAND vs. THE DY. CIT, ANAND CIRCLE, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 247/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year 2012-13

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2Section 271(1)(c)Section 37Section 43B

271(1)(c) on 08-02-2018. The assessee filed his submissions on 28-02-2018. The Assessing Officer passed penalty 2 I.T.A No. 247/Ahd/2025 Charotar Gas Sahkari Mandali Ltd., A.Y. 2012-13 order dated 30-08-2018 thereby levying the penalty of Rs. 34,59,573/- which is equal to the 100% of tax in respect of income

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD vs. AIA ENGINEERING LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 532/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 397/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Dcit Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J आयकर अपील सं / Ita No. 532/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Aia Engineering Limited, Acit, Vs. 115, Gvmm Estate, Odhav Road, Circle-1(1)(1), Odhav, Ahmedabad-382415 Ahmedabad Pan : Aabca 2777 J अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Revenue By : Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr Dr & Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2024 सुनवाई क" क" तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.10.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Pratik Sharma, Sr DR &
Section 154Section 250Section 32

154 dt. 06.02.2020) on electrical fittings u/s 32 of the Act?" 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored". 3. At the outset itself

THE SHUKLATIRTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,BHARUCH vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD, VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 806/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Ms Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 254Section 271Section 69

penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act is unjustified. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 4. The assessee is a co-operative credit society. For the year under consideration

THE SHUKLATIRTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD.,BHARUCH vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD, VADODARA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 807/AHD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Ms Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 254Section 271Section 69

penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act is unjustified. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 4. The assessee is a co-operative credit society. For the year under consideration

JAP AGRO FOODS PVT. LTD,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2) PREVIOUSLY ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1609/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Khandhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 250Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

154 read with section 254 on 24.02.2025 to correctly give effect to the Tribunal’s order in the quantum appeal. The assessee has further placed on record that it had filed an application for rectification of the order giving effect to the CIT(A) order on 27.02.2025, and till the date of filing of the present appeal, no order

BIREN DHIRAJLAL SHAH,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO,WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 194/AHD/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No: 194/Ahd/2021 &\nITA No: 190/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year: 2008-09\nBiren Dhirajlal Shah\nPlot No. 441-1, Sector-22\nNr. Police Chowkey,\nGandhinagar-382021\nPAN: ACSPS5653F\n(Appellant)\nIncome Tax Officer,\nWard-1,\nVs Gandhinagar\n(Respondent)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. &\nMs. Krupa Panchal, CA\nRevenue Represented:\nShri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R.\nDate of hearing\n: 19-03-2025\nDate of

Section 144Section 17Section 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act') relating\nto the Assessment Year 2008-09.\n2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 1607 days in filing\nITA No.194/Ahd/2021 and delay of 2513 days in filing ITA No.\n190/Ahd/2024.\n3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted

BIREN DHIRAJLAL SHAH,GANDHINAGAR vs. CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 190/AHD/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President\nAnd Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nITA No: 194/Ahd/2021 &\nITA No: 190/Ahd/2024\nAssessment Year: 2008-09\nBiren Dhirajlal Shah\nPlot No. 441-1, Sector-22\nNr. Police Chowkey,\nGandhinagar-382021\nPAN: ACSPS5653F\n(Appellant)\nAssessee Represented: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. &\nMs. Krupa Panchal, CA\nRevenue Represented:\nDate of hearing\nDate of pronouncement\nShri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R.\n: 19-03-2025\n: 03-04-2025\nIncome Tax Officer,\nWard-1,\nV

Section 144Section 17Section 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act') relating\nto the Assessment Year 2008-09.\nI.T.A No. 194/Ahd/2021 & ITA 190/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2008-09\nBiren Dhirajlal Shah vs. ITO\nPage No 2\n2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 1607 days in filing\nITA No.194/Ahd/2021 and delay of 2513 days