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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,041Mumbai1,426Ahmedabad526Kolkata506Jaipur470Bangalore467Indore306Chennai289Pune255Hyderabad171Karnataka140Chandigarh127Raipur116Rajkot110Surat107Amritsar106Lucknow102Visakhapatnam88Ranchi69Cuttack64Allahabad61Guwahati55Agra51Patna51Cochin45Nagpur43Dehradun37Calcutta37Jodhpur29Panaji17Kerala14Jabalpur12Telangana6Varanasi5SC4Rajasthan3Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)118Section 27494Section 143(3)67Penalty65Addition to Income63Section 14851Section 133A42Section 153C33Natural Justice33

M/S. CONCORDE HOUSING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 531/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) of the Act. 11. The Ld. AO erred in the penalty order by ignoring the jurisprudence laid by various Courts and CBDT Circulars. 12. The Appellant submits that each of the above grounds are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to one another. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, vary, omit or substitute

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

Showing 1–20 of 467 · Page 1 of 24

...
Section 27129
Section 14729
Deduction24

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2858/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 12 of 14 identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2856/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 12 of 14 identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2854/BANG/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 12 of 14 identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2855/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 12 of 14 identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2859/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 12 of 14 identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2857/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 12 of 14 identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition

SHRI S KRISHNA PRASAD ,BALLARI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

ITA 1172/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

natural justice are offended and no penalty could be imposed on the assessee on the basis of the notices issued by the AO u/s 271

SRI SURESH RAO SATHE.S,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2193/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2009-10 Shri. Suresh Rao Sathe S, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of No.16, 7Th Main, Income Tax, Indiranagar 2Nd Stage, Circle – 1(2)(1), Bengaluru – 560 038. Bengaluru – 560 095. Pan : Abips 1070 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Rajeev C. Nulvi, Ca Revenue By : Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 18.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2019

For Appellant: Shri. Rajeev C. Nulvi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty

SRI RAMAIAH REDDY ,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal for asst

ITA 977/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Jason P Boazsri C Ramaiah Reddy, Ramaiah Reddy Colony, Sector ‘C’, Basavanagar, Marthahalli, Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N Parbat, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 171(1)(c)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty

SMT B SUMATHY,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2005-06 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1777/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2005-06 Smt. B. Sumathy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, #T-401, Poorva Park, Ward – 1(2), Now Jeevana Halli Main Road, Ito, Ward – 1[2][2], Cox Town, Bangalore-560 005. Bangalore. Pan : Aseps 7079 K Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. T. Chandrasekhar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.04.2019

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. T. Chandrasekhar, Addl. CIT
Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty

SHRI. K. RAMASWAMY,MYSORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE--2(1),, MYSORE

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

ITA 1868/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

R.AJITH ,MYSORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), MYSORE

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

ITA 966/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

SHRI. K. RAMASWAMY,,MYSORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, MYSORE

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

ITA 1867/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

SHRI. AJITH R,,MYSORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, MYSORE

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

ITA 1870/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

SHRI. K. RAMASWAMY,MYSORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, MYSORE

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

ITA 1866/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

SHRI. AJITH R,MYSORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1),, MYSORE

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

ITA 1869/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

K.RAMASWAMY ,MYSORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), MYSORE

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

ITA 959/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

K RAMASWAMY ,MYSORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1), MYSORE

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

ITA 2527/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri A.K.Garodia

For Appellant: Shri Tatakrishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjeeth Singh, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 133ASection 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271 are mentioned would not satisfy requirement of law. r) The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, principles of natural justice is offended. On the basis of such ITA No.1866 to 1870/B/18 & Ors. Page 9 of 18 proceedings, no penalty could be imposed to the assessee. s) Taking up of penalty proceedings

SHRI V RAJESH KUMAR ,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 , CHITRADURGA

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1422/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year : 2011-12 Shri. V. Rajesh Kumar, Vs. Income Tax Officer, M/S. Sha Phoolchand Vijayraj, Ward – 1, Head Post Office Road, Chitradurga. Chitradurga. Pan : Abopr 2336 M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sandeep C, Ca Revenue By : Shri. L. V. Bhaskar Reddy, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 04.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.04.2019

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep C, CAFor Respondent: Shri. L. V. Bhaskar Reddy, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty