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.

15 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Long Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai733Delhi622Jaipur218Ahmedabad194Bangalore119Karnataka103Kolkata103Hyderabad92Pune81Indore72Chennai67Surat66Visakhapatnam57Chandigarh47Raipur44Calcutta35Lucknow28Rajkot26Ranchi21Amritsar15Nagpur14Agra13Cuttack11Patna10Guwahati6Jodhpur5Allahabad4Telangana4Dehradun3Cochin3Jabalpur2Varanasi1Rajasthan1Gauhati1Panaji1SC1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)30Section 14814Long Term Capital Gains12Penalty11Addition to Income10Capital Gains9Section 1478Section 143(3)7Section 1544

SH. VIJAY KUMAR,PROP. ,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, MOGA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 129/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Ghansham Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

long term capital gain as discussed above. Hence it cannot be termed on the part of the assessee that assessee was ignorant of legal position hence the discrepancy crept in while calculating the correct capital gain. Hence, the ratio of the referred case does not apply to the case of the assessee. Thus, there is no dispute over the fact

SH. SARWAN SINGH PHILLAUR,JALANDHAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Section 2714
Section 142(1)4
Section 2503
ITA 531/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 562/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. R.K.Sarna, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bhawani Shankar, DR
Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

Long Term Capital Gains on the amount of balance consideration in cash and value of flat which was yet to be received is not payable in the year under consideration cannot be considered to be totally unreasonable. He held that in view of this fact, the penalty u/s 271

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALANDHAR vs. SH. SARWAN SINGH PHILLAUR, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 562/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 562/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. R.K.Sarna, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bhawani Shankar, DR
Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 54

Long Term Capital Gains on the amount of balance consideration in cash and value of flat which was yet to be received is not payable in the year under consideration cannot be considered to be totally unreasonable. He held that in view of this fact, the penalty u/s 271

SH. RAGHUNATH SAHAI PURI(DECD),PATHANKOT vs. THE DEPTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATHANKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 633/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudhry & Sh. O. P. Meenai.T.A. No. 633/Asr/2014 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Alok Kumar CIT-DR
Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 45Section 48

long term capital gain, the action of the AO in 5 Sh. Raghunath Sahai Puri v. D.C.I.T. imposing penalty u/s 271

SHRI BARJINDERPAL SINGH BHULLAR,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (3), BATHINDA

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 672/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Long Term Capital Gain (“LTCG”, for short) had escaped assessment, reopened his case u/s 147 of the Act. Observing, that the Notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 06.06.2012 could not be served upon the assessee because as per the report of the notice server of the department the assessee had left India and his present whereabouts were not available

SHRI BRIJINDERPAL SINGH BHULLAR,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (3), BATHINDA

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 671/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Trilochan Singh PS Khalsa, DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Long Term Capital Gain (“LTCG”, for short) had escaped assessment, reopened his case u/s 147 of the Act. Observing, that the Notice u/s 148 of the Act, dated 06.06.2012 could not be served upon the assessee because as per the report of the notice server of the department the assessee had left India and his present whereabouts were not available

M/S SACHEDEVA & SONGS INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD,AMRITSAR. vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5,, AMRITSAR.

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

ITA 657/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. B.R. Baskaran & Sh. N.K.Choudhryassessment Year:2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Padam Bahl (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271

penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Act were initiated. In the return the assessee had shown interalia income under the head long term capital gain

MESERS EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD,PATHANKOT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 561/ASR/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

long term capital gain as land.’ In short, he accepted the assessee’s claim for deduction of WDV at Rs.71 lacs, allowing the assessee, thus, a relief of Rs.26.06 lacs (Rs.71 lacs – Rs.44.94 lacs), while upholding the separate working of LTCG on the value attributable to land. 2.3 The assessee moved an application u/s. 154 dated 15.05.2017 (on 18.5.2017/copy

M/S EMBROCIA FARMS PVT LTD. ,PATHANKOT vs. D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-6,, PATHANKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is (in ITA No

ITA 284/ASR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. Nos. 561/Asr/2018 & 284/Asr/2017 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. Tarsem Lal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

long term capital gain as land.’ In short, he accepted the assessee’s claim for deduction of WDV at Rs.71 lacs, allowing the assessee, thus, a relief of Rs.26.06 lacs (Rs.71 lacs – Rs.44.94 lacs), while upholding the separate working of LTCG on the value attributable to land. 2.3 The assessee moved an application u/s. 154 dated 15.05.2017 (on 18.5.2017/copy

SMT. JANAK RANI DHINGRA,HARYANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, MOGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 294/ASR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 294/(Asr)/2016 Assessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar, DR
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 54Section 54F

Long Term Capital Gains from sale of residential house as declared by the Assessee. Thereafter, the AO levied penalty u/s 271

THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, AMRITSAR. vs. SH. RAJIV MEHRA PROP., AMRITSAR.

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 452/ASR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 452(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Bhawani Shankar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

Long Term Capital Gains’ to Rs. 84,17,645/- to Rs. 1,70,737/-. 5. The Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal reversed the order of the CIT(A). 6. Thereafter, the AO levied penalty u/s 271

M/S. DADA MOTOR GARAGE,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 559/ASR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 234Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

long term capital gain has wrongly been made. 3. That the valuation of property is against law, facts and material on record further the reference to DVO in respect of other asset is absolutely incorrect. I.T.A. No.559/Asr/2018 5 Assessment Year: 2015-16 4. That the appellant request for the deletion of the impugned addition by accepting the returned loss

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUKTSAR vs. SH. MANPREET SINGH BADAL, MUKTSAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 616/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 616/Asr./2015 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Income Tax Officer, Vs Shri. Manpreet Singh Badal, Ward-Ii(2), S/O Shri. Gurdas Singh Badal, Muktsar Vill Badal, Distt. Muktsar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afjpb2460B

For Appellant: Shri. Ashwani Kalia, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ratinder Kaur, DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was imposed after confirmation of addition on account of long term capital gains

M/S. JAMMU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,,JAMMU ( J&K) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 498/ASR/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

For Appellant: Shri. R. K. Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri. M. P. Singh, CIT DR

terms and conditions by and between the development authority and the government.' Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir while discussing the provisions under the income tax Act Tax has held in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Jammu & Kashmir Tourism Department Development Corporation (2001) 166 CTR (J & K) 554 has held that the assessee corporation was entitled

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. JAMMU DEVELPMENT AUTHORITY,, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 494/ASR/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 498/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Jammu Development Authority, Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Tax, Circle-I, Complex, Jammu, J & K Jammu (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadfj7335A Ita No. 494/Asr./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs Jammu Development Authority, Tax, Circle-I, Vikas Bhawan, Rail Head Jammu Complex, Jammu, J & K (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcp1720E Assessee By : Shri. R. K. Gupta, Ca & Shri. Vasu Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Shri. M. P. Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :21.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 06.05.2013, Jammu.

For Appellant: Shri. R. K. Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Shri. M. P. Singh, CIT DR

terms and conditions by and between the development authority and the government.' Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir while discussing the provisions under the income tax Act Tax has held in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Jammu & Kashmir Tourism Department Development Corporation (2001) 166 CTR (J & K) 554 has held that the assessee corporation was entitled