Search: penalty u/s 271 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

24 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 163clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi166 Raipur87 Mumbai57 Jaipur48 Allahabad40 Chennai37 Chandigarh32 Amritsar24 Hyderabad22 Pune19 Ahmedabad15 Kolkata13 Lucknow12 Surat11 Bangalore11 Patna10 Nagpur10 Indore9 Visakhapatnam7 Cochin5 Dehradun4 Rajkot4 Jabalpur2 Ranchi2 SC1 Varanasi1 Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)24 Addition to Income24 Section 80I20 Section 269S12 Section 250(6)12 Section 25010 Section 3210 Section 43(1)10 Section 148

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

penalty u/s 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

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

10

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

penalty u/s 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

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. FIL INDUSTRIES LTD, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 471/ASR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FILL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 291/ASR/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2004-05

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S. FIL INDUSTRIES LTD, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 470/ASR/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

M/S FIL INDUSTRIES LTD,SRINAGAR vs. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 255/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FILL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 289/ASR/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2002-03

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FILL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 290/ASR/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2003-04

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FIL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 292/ASR/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FIL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 293/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAMMU vs. M/S FIL INDUSTRIES,, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 294/ASR/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

M/S FIL INDUSTRIES LTD,SRINAGAR vs. THE DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SRINAGAR

In the result appeal of the assessee ground no 4 to 4

ITA 417/ASR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 43(1)Section 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are, therefore, initiated on this issue.” 14. The ld. counsel for the assessee further argued and relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph 15 of the CIT(A) order is extracted as below: “15 ISSUE 8: DISALLOWANCEOFDEPRECIATIONOFRS.18,92,163/- ANDRS. 3,10,253/- U/S

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. DMR BUILDERS PVT LTD, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 292/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act for concealing particulars of income are simultaneously initiated.” 8. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT (A), has considered all materials on record and has arrived at the conclusion that in absence of any material brought on record there is not even

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. DMR BUILDERS PVT LTD, BATHINDA

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 293/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act for concealing particulars of income are simultaneously initiated.” 8. The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the Ld. CIT (A), has considered all materials on record and has arrived at the conclusion that in absence of any material brought on record there is not even

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA vs. MEASAGE GURDAS AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED, BATHINDA

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

ITA 510/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

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 516/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

MEASAGE GURDAS AGRO 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 517/ASR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 May 2023AY 2016-17

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

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

MEASAGE G. G. OILS AND FATS 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 494/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)

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

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)

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There

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)

penalty proceedings u/ s 271(l)(c) are initiated simultaneously for furnishing inaccurate particulars of the income.” I.T.A. Nos.506/Asr/2019 8 & Others 7. The ld. DR vehemently argued and mentioned that the transaction related to “high sea sale” is speculative transaction and the loss earned from this transaction would be treated as speculative loss u/s 43(5) of the Act. There