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.

27 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 11(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,096Delhi958Jaipur363Ahmedabad341Chennai262Bangalore232Hyderabad207Indore194Surat192Kolkata156Raipur140Pune128Rajkot84Nagpur78Chandigarh69Cochin60Lucknow58Allahabad54Visakhapatnam51Cuttack38Ranchi32Amritsar27Guwahati20Agra17Panaji17Patna16Jabalpur15Dehradun14Jodhpur13Varanasi7

Key Topics

Addition to Income23Section 14721Section 250(6)20Section 25018Section 143(3)16Section 27113Section 26313Section 1489Penalty

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)

271(1)(b) of the Act for noncompliance of notices. 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the appellant submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,95,406/- in each appeal on account of excess NP @ 5% on estimating turn over comprising of cash deposited

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

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 1428
Cash Deposit7
Natural Justice5

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)

271(1)(b) of the Act for noncompliance of notices. 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the appellant submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,95,406/- in each appeal on account of excess NP @ 5% on estimating turn over comprising of cash deposited

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 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)

271(1)(b) of the Act for noncompliance of notices. 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the appellant submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,95,406/- in each appeal on account of excess NP @ 5% on estimating turn over comprising of cash deposited

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)

271(1)(b) of the Act for noncompliance of notices. 4. At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the appellant submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,95,406/- in each appeal on account of excess NP @ 5% on estimating turn over comprising of cash deposited

NAVJEEVAN CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 215/ASR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Gunjeet Singh Syal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 154Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 273B

271(l)(b) but are equally applicable to penalties levied u/s 272A(l)(d) as in both the sections, the penalty is leviable in cases of non-compliance to directions to get books audited u/s 142(2A). Hence, the contentions of the AR, in the present case, that as the Special Audit has been completed, hence the penalty order should

M/S. SURYA AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,ABOHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 348/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Krinwant Sahayaftfrcf ^T./Ita No. 348/Asr/2023 / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Surya Automobiles Pvt The Dcit, <Shh Circle Ii, Ltd., Near Dav Campus, Bhatinda Hanumangarh Road, Abohar ^|41<^H./Pan No: Aafcs271 In Ul^^Ff/Respondent Appellant

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Arora, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Neelam Sharma, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 44

Section 271 (1) (c) was not challenged /no appeal was filed. The Id. CIT(A) in his order has clearly given his findings on this as under:- ".....However, the appellant has not filed any appeal on account of addition of Rs. 18,82,009/- u/s 36(l)(iii) of the Act. Since, the addition of Rs. 3,44,431/- made

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

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

JAGTAR SINGH BRAR PROP. JAGTAR SINGH SADHU SINGH,BAGAPURANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, MOGA, MOGA

In the result, the penalty imposed u/s 271(1) (c) amounting to Rs

ITA 70/ASR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. Abhinav Vijh, C.A
Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44A

D. R. Respondent by Date of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi dated 25.11.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the penalty order of the AO, Ward-3, Moga passed u/s

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

D. R. Respondent by Date of Hearing : 21.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi dated 12.03.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the penalty order of the AO, Ward 1(1), Jalandhar passed

SMT. RAJINDER KAUR,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, DASUYA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

penalty proceedings u/s 271 (l)(c) of the Act have been initiated since assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s. 263 of the Act has been made by National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (NFAC) vide order dated 28.03.2022. Assessee was further informed that appeal against assessment order is required to be filed and assessee is also entitled to question the order passed

SHRI ADIL KHURSHID BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 579/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C.A
Section 147Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 44A

D. R. Date of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.08.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: The above three appeals has been preferred by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961, all dated 26/08/2024, which has emanated from the order of the AO (AU), passed u/s 147 (r.w.s. 144B) dated

SHRI ADIL KHURSHID BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 581/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C.A
Section 147Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 44A

D. R. Date of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.08.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: The above three appeals has been preferred by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961, all dated 26/08/2024, which has emanated from the order of the AO (AU), passed u/s 147 (r.w.s. 144B) dated

SH ADIL KHURSHID BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 580/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C.A
Section 147Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 44A

D. R. Date of Hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.08.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: The above three appeals has been preferred by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961, all dated 26/08/2024, which has emanated from the order of the AO (AU), passed u/s 147 (r.w.s. 144B) dated

SAINIK CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD,JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAMMU, JAMMU AND KASHMIR

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

ITA 701/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 24Section 250Section 69

d) order, 4 I.T.A. Nos. 701 & 406/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 copies of notice u/s 148 and copies of bank statement of Punjab National Bank and The Citizens Cooperative Bank Ltd. being the two bank accounts where the financial transactions of the assessee has taken place. He submitted that there has not been any fresh investment in fixed deposit

SAINIK COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LIMITED,SAINIK COLONY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD-1, JAMMU

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

ITA 406/ASR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. &
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)Section 24Section 250Section 69

d) order, 4 I.T.A. Nos. 701 & 406/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 copies of notice u/s 148 and copies of bank statement of Punjab National Bank and The Citizens Cooperative Bank Ltd. being the two bank accounts where the financial transactions of the assessee has taken place. He submitted that there has not been any fresh investment in fixed deposit

SHRI TAJINDER KUMAR,BATALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BATALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 290/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 147Section 250(6)

D.R. Date of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.05.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.02.2024 passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of Assessing officer, NFAC passed u/s

SHRI TAJINDER KUMAR,BATALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BATALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 289/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 147Section 250(6)

D.R. Date of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.05.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.02.2024 passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of Assessing officer, NFAC passed u/s

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. MEASAGE G.G.OILS AND FAITS PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

ITA 505/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

d) of Rule 46A and no I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 5 & Others reasons have been recorded by the CIT(A) for admitting such additional evidence. (iv) The CIT(A) erred in not taking into consideration the findings of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs Bhaval Synthetics India, 81 taxmann.com 478 wherein, it was held that interest earned

SHRI GURDAS GARG,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

ITA 498/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

d) of Rule 46A and no I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 5 & Others reasons have been recorded by the CIT(A) for admitting such additional evidence. (iv) The CIT(A) erred in not taking into consideration the findings of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs Bhaval Synthetics India, 81 taxmann.com 478 wherein, it was held that interest earned

MEASAGE G. G. CONTINENTAL TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BATHINDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals

ITA 495/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

d) of Rule 46A and no I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 5 & Others reasons have been recorded by the CIT(A) for admitting such additional evidence. (iv) The CIT(A) erred in not taking into consideration the findings of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs Bhaval Synthetics India, 81 taxmann.com 478 wherein, it was held that interest earned