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.

2 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 69Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur89Chandigarh28Mumbai26Ahmedabad25Indore23Delhi22Surat21Pune21Bangalore20Chennai9Jabalpur5Cochin4Hyderabad3Rajkot3Kolkata2Allahabad2Raipur2Amritsar2

Key Topics

Section 1485Section 271(1)(c)2Addition to Income2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, JALANDHAR vs. SHRI SUMAN AGGARWAL, JALANDHAR

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed being infructuous

ITA 101/ASR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Laliet Kumar & Dr. M. L. Meenai.T.A. No. 101/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69B

section 36(l)(iii). The Assessing Officer has brought on record that the assessee has made interest free advances and loans to his family members/sister concerns in the following manner:- xxxxxxxxxxx At the same time had debited bank interest to the tune of Rs.22.19 lacs. The Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain as to how the interest bearing funds

SMT. KAMAL GANDHI,NAWANSHEHAR vs. A.C.I.T, CENTRAL CIRCLE- II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 458/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. No. 458/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. M. R. Bhagat & Rajinder Kumar ChopraFor Respondent: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c), alluded to by the ld. CIT(A), is not applicable as the search was after 31.05.2007, and even as observed during hearing, that would be wholly inconsequential as Explanation 5A, a pari materia provision, applicable to searches after 31.05.2007, would stand attracted, which in fact is more stringent than Explanation 5. Being a part