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.

4 results for “reassessment”+ Section 271Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Pune18Mumbai17Delhi15Jaipur14Agra9Indore9Kolkata7Chennai4Ahmedabad4Raipur2Surat2Nagpur2Patna1Bangalore1

Key Topics

Section 271D18Section 269S12Section 271E8Cash Deposit4Penalty4Limitation/Time-bar4Section 273B2Section 32Section 562Section 148

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

271E of the Act respectively. Further Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in invoking Section 273B of the Act and deleting the penalties levied by the assessing officer. Thus requested to uphold the penalties. 6. Per contra Ld. Counsel Shri Dhinal Shah appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the assessee was issued reopening notice u/s.148A

2
Reassessment2

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

271E of the Act respectively. Further Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in invoking Section 273B of the Act and deleting the penalties levied by the assessing officer. Thus requested to uphold the penalties. 6. Per contra Ld. Counsel Shri Dhinal Shah appearing for the assessee submitted before us that the assessee was issued reopening notice u/s.148A

NEETABEN PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 1793/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

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

Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

reassessment order thereby the penalty levied u/s. 271D and 271E are bad in law and relied upon various case laws. Perusal of the penalty order makes it clear, the assessee was issued with a show cause notice dated 04-07-2019 as to why not impose penalty u/s. 271D and 271E for contravening the provisions of Section

NEETABEN PATEL,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

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

ITA 1794/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Feb 2026AY 2011-12
Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

reassessment order thereby the penalty levied u/s. 271D and 271E are bad in law and relied upon various case laws. Perusal of the penalty order makes it clear, the assessee was issued with a show cause notice dated 04-07-2019 as to why not impose penalty u/s. 271D and 271E for contravening the provisions of Section