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.

42 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 271Fclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi158Mumbai97Jaipur72Indore72Bangalore65Ahmedabad42Rajkot36Surat29Karnataka23Amritsar22Cuttack19Pune18Chennai18Chandigarh15Visakhapatnam13Nagpur12Lucknow11Hyderabad9Kolkata8Jabalpur6Panaji5Raipur4Patna3Guwahati3Allahabad2Cochin1SC1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 14859Section 271F46Section 271(1)(c)41Section 14739Penalty35Section 14434Addition to Income30Section 143(2)28Section 69A26

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 706/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhyaru, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 271F

section 271F of the Act. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 11. Before going into the assessee’s specific set of facts, it would be useful to discuss some relevant judicial precedents on the subject. ITA Nos. 705 to 707/Ahd/2025 Avani Dipakbhai Shah vs. ACIT Asst. Years

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

Showing 1–20 of 42 · Page 1 of 3

Cash Deposit20
Section 25012
Limitation/Time-bar11

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 707/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhyaru, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 271F

section 271F of the Act. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 11. Before going into the assessee’s specific set of facts, it would be useful to discuss some relevant judicial precedents on the subject. ITA Nos. 705 to 707/Ahd/2025 Avani Dipakbhai Shah vs. ACIT Asst. Years

AVANI DIPAKBHAI SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE INTL. TXN., VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 705/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Jigar Adhyaru, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 271F

section 271F of the Act. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. 11. Before going into the assessee’s specific set of facts, it would be useful to discuss some relevant judicial precedents on the subject. ITA Nos. 705 to 707/Ahd/2025 Avani Dipakbhai Shah vs. ACIT Asst. Years

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. KGN INDUSTRIES LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal field by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 9/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: None
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 148Section 14ASection 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 271FSection 40

271(1)(c) by the Assessing Officer is hereby restored. 6. This view of ours is further supported by producing the penalty order dated 18.06.2015 passed u/s. 271F by the Assessing Officer wherein he has levied a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- for not filing the Return of Income as per the Section

SHANTIJI PIRAJI SUTHAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

ITA 788/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.787/Ahd/2024, 788/Ahd/2024 & 789/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shantiji Piraji Suthar The Ito बनाम/ Sherpura, Ward-4 V/S. Tal.Deesa Palanpur – 385 001 Banaskantha – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwops 8650 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 68

penalties u/s 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act)"]. Facts of the case: 2. The assessee, Shantiji Piraji Suthar, an illiterate farmer residing in a remote village, did not file his return of income for the AY 2010-11, as his sole source of income was agricultural, which is exempt

SHANTIJI PIRAJI SUTHAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

ITA 787/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.787/Ahd/2024, 788/Ahd/2024 & 789/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shantiji Piraji Suthar The Ito बनाम/ Sherpura, Ward-4 V/S. Tal.Deesa Palanpur – 385 001 Banaskantha – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwops 8650 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 68

penalties u/s 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act)"]. Facts of the case: 2. The assessee, Shantiji Piraji Suthar, an illiterate farmer residing in a remote village, did not file his return of income for the AY 2010-11, as his sole source of income was agricultural, which is exempt

SHANTIJI PIRAJI SUTHAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

ITA 789/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.787/Ahd/2024, 788/Ahd/2024 & 789/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shantiji Piraji Suthar The Ito बनाम/ Sherpura, Ward-4 V/S. Tal.Deesa Palanpur – 385 001 Banaskantha – 385 535 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Bwops 8650 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR
Section 10(1)Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 68

penalties u/s 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act)"]. Facts of the case: 2. The assessee, Shantiji Piraji Suthar, an illiterate farmer residing in a remote village, did not file his return of income for the AY 2010-11, as his sole source of income was agricultural, which is exempt

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

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

DCIT CIRCLE GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR vs. SHRI UMIYA CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD LINCH, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1933/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271ESection 273BSection 3Section 56

271F, section 271FA, 99[section 271FAB.] section 271FB, section 271G, 1[section 271GA,J 2[section 271GB,] section 271H, 3 section 271-1], 4[section 271J,] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA or section 2728 or sub- section (1) or sub-section

DCIT, CIRCLE GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR vs. SHRI UMIYA CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD LINCH, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1932/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

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

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271ESection 273BSection 3Section 56

271F, section 271FA, 99[section 271FAB.] section 271FB, section 271G, 1[section 271GA,J 2[section 271GB,] section 271H, 3 section 271-1], 4[section 271J,] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA or section 2728 or sub- section (1) or sub-section

M/S GURUKRUPA DEVELOPERS,GODHRA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 41/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 M/S Gurukrupa Developers, D.C.I.T., Mahavir Complex, Vs. Central Circle-1, Opp. Fci Godown, Vadodara. Sapana Road, Godhra-389001. Pan: Aaifg8293P

For Appellant: Shri Ketan H. Shah, with Shri Aman K. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 271BSection 27ISection 44Section 44A

u/s 271B. I find no reason to interfere with the penalty order for the AY 2012-13. 6. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT-A, the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The learned AR before us inter-alia submitted that the books and other supporting documents of the assessee were impounded by the search team

SAROJBEN NATVARBHAI PATEL,CHHOTAUDEPUR vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(4), VADODARA

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

ITA 375/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri Sanket Bakshi, ARFor Respondent: \nShri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 144BSection 148Section 148ASection 149Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

271(1)(b) of the Act.\n17. The learned CIT(A) and the AO erred in fact and in law in initiating penalty\nproceedings u/s. 271F of the Act.\n18. The Appellant reserves the right to add, or modify, or substitute, or alter, or\ndelete all or any of the grounds of appeal.\"\nThe brief facts of the case

JASWANT N. SONI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, INTL. TAXN. , AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1372/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69

Sections 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Act 11. In view of the above, the penalty levied u/s 271

JASWANT N. SONI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,INTL.TAXN., AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1371/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69

Sections 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Act 11. In view of the above, the penalty levied u/s 271

JASWANT N. SONI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, INTL. TAXN., AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 114/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69

Sections 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Act 11. In view of the above, the penalty levied u/s 271

SHRI SANJAYBHAI D PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 509/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. M.M. Garg, Sr. D.R
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 274

u/s 147/148 is accepted as such by the AO. The Learned CIT (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the Appellant has reasonable cause for not filing the return as he was under bonafide belief that since the entire income was received after deduction of tax at source, no return is required to be filed. Accordingly, the appellant prays that

UPENKUMAR AMRUTJI VIHOL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2)(PREVIOUSLY ITO, WARD-1, ANAND), VADODARA

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

ITA 556/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Manan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69A

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act towards concealment of income and under Section 271F of the Act on account of non-filing of return of income by the assessee, for the impugned assessment year. Since the facts and issues for consideration are common for ITA Nos. 554 to 556/Ahd/2025 Upenkumar Amrutji Vihol vs. ITO Asst. Year

UPENKUMAR AMRUTJI VIHOL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2)(PREVIOUSLY ITO, WARD-1, ANAND), VADODARA

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

ITA 555/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Manan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69A

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act towards concealment of income and under Section 271F of the Act on account of non-filing of return of income by the assessee, for the impugned assessment year. Since the facts and issues for consideration are common for ITA Nos. 554 to 556/Ahd/2025 Upenkumar Amrutji Vihol vs. ITO Asst. Year

UPENKUMAR AMRUTJI VIHOL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 554/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Manan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69A

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act towards concealment of income and under Section 271F of the Act on account of non-filing of return of income by the assessee, for the impugned assessment year. Since the facts and issues for consideration are common for ITA Nos. 554 to 556/Ahd/2025 Upenkumar Amrutji Vihol vs. ITO Asst. Year