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.

47 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ TDSclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi869Mumbai812Bangalore262Ahmedabad177Chennai156Kolkata140Jaipur134Raipur106Hyderabad87Pune81Indore61Surat50Chandigarh47Nagpur42Rajkot37Karnataka29Visakhapatnam27Amritsar21Lucknow17Cochin15Dehradun13Allahabad10Panaji10Jabalpur8Jodhpur7Guwahati7Patna6Agra5Cuttack4Ranchi2SC1Kerala1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 206C46Section 26342Section 27133Addition to Income31TDS29Section 271(1)(c)22Section 143(3)21Penalty21Section 14820

SH. SUKHWINDER SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 372/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Us Challenging The Levy Of Penalty Both On Legal Ground As Well As On Merits Of The Case :

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Garg, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

271(1)(c) of the Act. 12 A.Y.2010-11 10. Admittedly, the disallowance made in the present case on which penalty had been levied, related to payments made to petty tank owners, amounting to Rs.3,38,43,488/-, u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non deduction of tax at source. The Revenues case for justifying the levy of penalty

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

Section 27417
Disallowance15
Section 20614

M/S CORE METAL KRAFTS LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-5(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 347/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Us.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT
Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43B

penalty u/s 271(l)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 on the addition of Rs 7,4777- on account of interest on TDS

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1233/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

u/s 271(l)(c) is against the well-established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1234/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

u/s 271(l)(c) is against the well-established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1231/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

u/s 271(l)(c) is against the well-established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1232/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

u/s 271(l)(c) is against the well-established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1236/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

u/s 271(l)(c) is against the well-established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed

KARNAIL SINGH,UK vs. JCIT (OSD) INTL. TAXATION, CIRCLE, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1235/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sanat KapoorFor Respondent: Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 274Section 90

u/s 271(l)(c) is against the well-established norms, case laws and jurisprudence of penalty under the Income Tax Act and against various judicial pronouncements. 9. That the lower authorities have failed to appreciate that this is a simple case where the assessee declared the income under the head Income From House Property but the revenue has assessed

SH RAMESH KUMAR DUDANI,MOHALI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE -6(1), MOHALI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1146/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2020AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Nalin K. Nohria, C.A Shri B.K. Nohria, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rishi Kumar, ACIT
Section 154Section 246ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

TDS on accrual of interest. As such the assessee has reasonable cause for non-disclosure of the same and has paid the income tax due in time. It is therefore prayed that the penalty proceedings may be dropped on this issue ." ………….. 3. That disallowance of 20% of the Foreign travelling is an agreed addition

SH. PRINCE SHARMA,CHANDIGARH vs. ACIT, C-5(1), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 65/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Anil Batra, AdvFor Respondent: Ms/ Geetinder Mann, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 23(1)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset it was pointed out to us from the order of the authorities below that the penalty was levied on account of the following additions made: 1) Addition on account of notional rent u/s 23(1) of the Act = Rs.1,93,200/- 2 A.Y.2013-14 2) Addition on account of un- disclosed

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,SHIMLA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 906/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

u/s 271CA on the appellant is duly covered by the provisions of section 273B of the I.T. Act, 1961 and the appellant duly had a genuine reasonable cause as explained above for not collecting the Tax at Source (TCS). Moreover, the admission of the appeal by the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court also supports the bona fide

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,NAHAN vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 904/CHANDI/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

u/s 271CA on the appellant is duly covered by the provisions of section 273B of the I.T. Act, 1961 and the appellant duly had a genuine reasonable cause as explained above for not collecting the Tax at Source (TCS). Moreover, the admission of the appeal by the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court also supports the bona fide

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,SHIMLA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 905/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

u/s 271CA on the appellant is duly covered by the provisions of section 273B of the I.T. Act, 1961 and the appellant duly had a genuine reasonable cause as explained above for not collecting the Tax at Source (TCS). Moreover, the admission of the appeal by the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court also supports the bona fide

THE ASSISTANT EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER ,NAHAN vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE, SHIMLA

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 903/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.903 /Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2007-08 The Assistant Excise & बनाम The Additional Cit, Taxation Commissioner, Tds Range, Nahan Shimla "थायीलेखासं./Pan/Tan No: Ptla12468B अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh.Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. AmanpreetKaur, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 206Section 206CSection 271C

u/s 271CA on the appellant is duly covered by the provisions of section 273B of the I.T. Act, 1961 and the appellant duly had a genuine reasonable cause as explained above for not collecting the Tax at Source (TCS). Moreover, the admission of the appeal by the Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court also supports the bona fide

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 987/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: the disposal of the same.

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40

u/s 271(1)(c) and then confirmed by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 6. That the appellant craves for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. 3. Briefly, the facts

M/S HERITAGE MARKETING,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-3(2), CHANDIGARH

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 284/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Heritage Marketing Vs. The Ito Sco-64, F.F., Sector-20-C Ward-3(2), Dakshin Marg, Chandigarh Chandigarh

For Appellant: Sh. Om Dutt SharmaFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh
Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) Act. 2. Penalty in the present case has been levied on the addition made to the income of the assessee on account of difference in the Tax Deducted at Source(in short “TDS

SHIV KUMAR & SONS (HUF),RAJPURA vs. ITO, RAJPURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 288/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. D.K Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. We have heard the rival submissions and have also gone through the records. We find that the Assessing officer in this case has levied penalty in respect of ¼ of the expenses claimed as commission payment by the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has taken us through the assessment records whereby

M/S SHANTI SALES INDIA PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-III, LUDHIANA

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1584/CHANDI/2017[201-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1584/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Y.K. Saxena, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 68

TDS was not applicable. ITA No. 1045-Chd-2019 Sh. Mahesh Kumar Goel, Ludhiana 6 The Ld. Counsel has further submitted that during the period, when the assessment proceedings were pending in the case, the Directors of the Company were under depression due to recovery proceedings initiated by their Bankers viz. Bank of India. The said company had raised loan

PUNJAB CHEMICALS & CROP. PROTECTION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 100/CHANDI/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Anil KhannaFor Respondent: Mrs. Mona Mohanty
Section 111ASection 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 6(1)(iii)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income to the tune of Rs. 2,75,831/-. 4.2. The issue stands adjudicated by the order of the ITAT for the A.Y. 2006-07 which is as under: 3. The learned AR for the assessee at the outset

M/S PUNJAB CHEMICALS & CROP. PROTECTION LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, CHANDIGARH

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 60/CHANDI/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Anil KhannaFor Respondent: Mrs. Mona Mohanty
Section 111ASection 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 6(1)(iii)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income to the tune of Rs. 2,75,831/-. 4.2. The issue stands adjudicated by the order of the ITAT for the A.Y. 2006-07 which is as under: 3. The learned AR for the assessee at the outset