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.

63 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi742Mumbai560Ahmedabad303Jaipur244Indore199Bangalore172Chennai167Pune132Kolkata130Hyderabad129Raipur101Rajkot96Chandigarh82Surat73Amritsar63Allahabad51Lucknow50Patna47Visakhapatnam43Ranchi41Guwahati40Nagpur32Agra28Cuttack25Cochin21Dehradun18Jodhpur15Jabalpur9Panaji3Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 14873Addition to Income57Section 25053Section 271F53Section 14742Penalty33Section 143(3)31Section 271(1)(c)28Section 144

SHRI SANTOKH SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 2 (1), AMRITSAR

The appeals of the assessees are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 33/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(b)

justice, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee and modify the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restrict the net profit rate to 1% of the gross receipts, which is more than the percentage in the last 3 years. We therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to compute the addition @ 1% of the gross receipts. Appeal filed

SHRI SANTOKH SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 (1), AMRITSAR

Showing 1–20 of 63 · Page 1 of 4

25
Section 139(1)24
Natural Justice24
Disallowance14

The appeals of the assessees are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 32/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(b)

justice, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee and modify the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restrict the net profit rate to 1% of the gross receipts, which is more than the percentage in the last 3 years. We therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to compute the addition @ 1% of the gross receipts. Appeal filed

SHRI SANTOKH SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2 (1), AMRITSAR

The appeals of the assessees are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 31/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(b)

justice, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee and modify the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restrict the net profit rate to 1% of the gross receipts, which is more than the percentage in the last 3 years. We therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to compute the addition @ 1% of the gross receipts. Appeal filed

SHRI SANTOKH SINGH ,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 (1), AMRITSAR

The appeals of the assessees are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 34/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 151Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(b)

justice, we partly allow the appeal of the assessee and modify the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restrict the net profit rate to 1% of the gross receipts, which is more than the percentage in the last 3 years. We therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to compute the addition @ 1% of the gross receipts. Appeal filed

SHRI YASH PAUL MALHOTRA,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 379/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(C) of the Act of Rs. 17,68,888/- as confirmed by Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi is illegal and bad in law since additional income was offered to tax during survey operations on 09.09.2015 subject to no penal action. Penalty imposed is opposed to judgement of Honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case

SHRI BALBIR SINGH M/S JAIDEEP GIFT CENTRE TAPTEJ SINGH MARKET,MOGA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MOGA RANGE MOGA, MOGA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 746/ASR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Radhey Shyam Jaiswal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 27Section 271D

271 E/27 ID is not called for. In the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel, (2009) 315 ITR 163 (P&H) it has been mentioned that under section 273B, the assessee is permitted to show cause and tender explanation. The explanation of the assessee was found to be bona fide by the tribunal and it was also held that

SHRI BALBIR SINGH M/S JAIDEEP GIFT CENTRE, TAPTEJ SINGH MARKET ,MOGA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MOGA RANGE , MOGA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 745/ASR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Radhey Shyam Jaiswal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 27Section 271D

271 E/27 ID is not called for. In the case of CIT Vs. Sunil Kumar Goel, (2009) 315 ITR 163 (P&H) it has been mentioned that under section 273B, the assessee is permitted to show cause and tender explanation. The explanation of the assessee was found to be bona fide by the tribunal and it was also held that

INDIAN TOOL TECHNOLOGY CENTRE,JALANDHAR vs. ITO, WARD 1(1) , JALANDHAR

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

ITA 262/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, C.A
Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 56

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, ignoring the facts of case and without observing the principles of natural justice

SHRI ROHTASH MONGA,FEROZEPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, FEROZEPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 286/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Krinwant Sahay31Tw? 'Jnftct ^T./Ita No. 286/Asr/2023 Ptyfaui / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Rohtash Monga,' The Acit, Prop. Monga Jewellers, Circle, F.City, Punjab 152002 Ferozepur Wft^Felfh./Pan No: Adqpm0639Q Hitt^/'Respondent 3141 Cl L‘4F/ A P P E 11 A N T ( Hybridhearing ) 3F(T Tt/Assessee By : Shri P.N. Arora, Advocate 'Im'Wcftl 3{R ■$/ Revenue By : Mrs. Neelam Sharma, Sr.Dr ^Hcft^Dt^Wdate Of Hearing 27.12.2024 U 11 Cfrlctt'^Wdate Of Pronouncement 3Ft‘I^T/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2023Passed By Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac). Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - 2. That Whether The Worthy Cit(A). Nfac Is Right In Confirming 1. The Penalty Levied U/S 271-D For A.Y. 2017-2018 Passed On Dt. 16.9.2023 Which Was Not Initiated With The Assessment Order Passed 30.11.2019 By Ao, Range-1. Ferozepur Keeping In View The Letter Of Offer Surrender Dt. 8.11.2011 In Which It Is Written That Surrender Is Subject To No Penal Action Against The Assessee, Which Was Accepted By The Survey Party As Veil As The A.O. Who Framed The Assessment For A. O. 17-18, If Wrong, Then The Penult Orders May Kindly Be Quashed. \

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Neelam Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269SSection 271Section 271A

natural justice. During the proceedings before us, the Id. Counsel for the Assessee 3. has filed written submissions which is reproduced as under: - Statement of facts in the case of Sh. Rohtash Monga Prop., M/S Monga Jewellers. That worthy CIT(A), NFAC issued notice u/s 250 vide No. ITBA AC/F//APL-1/2023-2024/1054733125(1) DATED 31.7.2023 for submission of reply

SHRI GURBACHAN SINGH S/O SH. GURDEV SINGH,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 1 (4), MANSA

In the result, the quantum appeal in ITA No

ITA 197/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

271 (1)(c) is otherwise not sustainable as no specific charge as to whether the penalty have been levied for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income have been established. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, any ground of grounds of appeal during the course of hearing.” 3. The assessee has raised

SHRI GURBACHAN SINGH S/O SHRI.GURDEV SINGH ,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (4 ), MANSA

In the result, the quantum appeal in ITA No

ITA 198/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

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

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

271 (1)(c) is otherwise not sustainable as no specific charge as to whether the penalty have been levied for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income have been established. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, any ground of grounds of appeal during the course of hearing.” 3. The assessee has raised

SH BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 184/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH. BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 175/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH. BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 176/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 177/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 181/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 179/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH BARINDEJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 182/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 178/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s

SH BARINDERJIT SINGH L/H OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 180/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 27Section 271FSection 274Section 56

nature of interest to the tune of Rs. 1,02,04,924/- from various banks during the year under consideration. Subsequently, notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued to the appellant after getting necessary approval from the appropriate authority. However, the said notice was not complied with by the appellant. Thereafter assessment was completed u/s. 144 r.w.s