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.

6 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 194Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai41Bangalore33Delhi26Nagpur16Hyderabad9Pune9Chandigarh9Jaipur7Kolkata6Ahmedabad6Visakhapatnam5Jabalpur5Chennai4Panaji3Raipur2Dehradun2Surat1Indore1Agra1Cuttack1Amritsar1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 80I8Section 407Section 271(1)(c)6Section 80P(4)5Disallowance5Section 143(3)4Section 197(1)4Section 194A3Section 80P(2)(a)3

M/S. DRAIPL-MSKEL(JV),,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1605/AHD/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2007-08 Draipl-Kskel (Jv) Ito, Ward-9(2) 2Nd Floor, “Msk” Vs. Ahmedabad. Passport Office To Panjarapole Rd. Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaaad 3825 B (Applicant) (Responent)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 80I

u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income in respect of both additions. After issuing show cause and considering the assessee’s replies dated 06.07.2010 and 29.02.2012, the AO levied minimum penalty of Rs.87,36,356/- being 100% of tax sought to be evaded. During the course of penalty proceedings on disallowance under section 80IA

Penalty3
TDS3
Deduction3

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ARVIND RETAIL LTD. ( SINCE MERGED WITH ARVIND LIFESTYLE BRANDS LTD.,), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the Cross Objection of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3669/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Vartik R. Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARs
Section 36(1)(xi)Section 40

194A of the Act. 8.12. Regarding the interest payment of Rs. 2,32,890/- to ALBL, the learned CIT (A) found that the confirmation received from Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited does not include the amount of interest expenses paid by the assessee to ALBL. Accordingly, the learned CIT (A) confirmed the order of the AO. 8.13. Being aggrieved

SHRI ASHOKKUMAR DEVICHAND LODHA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, TDS RANGE,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 942/AHD/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).The Ld.Cit(A) Has Sustained The Impugned Penalty.

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 197(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271CSection 40

section 194A of the act. Thereafter the assessing officer has referred the case to the JCIT,TDS Range for initiation of penalty u/s 271

M/S. BAJAJ FOODS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(2),, AHMEDABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1647/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Parimalsigh Parmar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 250(6)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income are being initiated on this account. 19. ld. Counsel for the assessee further pointed out that the despite reiterating these contentions before the Ld. CIT(A) also. The same were also rejected for the same reasons by the Ld. CIT(A). He drew our attention

THE MAHALAXMI CREDIT CO. OP. SOCIETY LTD.,,KHEDA vs. THE ITO, WARD- 3,, NADIAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 153/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Parth Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 80p(2)(d)

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(l)(c) rws 274 of the Act initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. [Disallowance Rs.19,49,051]" 4. The assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. The relevant part of the decision of ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under

MINAL PRASHANT VAKIL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE. PRASHANT RASIKLAL VAKIL,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 1, INTERNATIONAL TAX AHMEDABAD , AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1546/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 194ASection 234ASection 250Section 271(1)Section 69

194A but no Return of Income filed. Therefore the assessment was reopened and a show cause notice u/s. 148A(b) was issued to the assessee. As there was no response, notice u/s. 148 was issued on 29-03-2022. In response, the assessee filed a Return of Income on 03-03-2023 declaring total income