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.

4 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 46Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi212Mumbai131Jaipur60Ahmedabad56Kolkata26Hyderabad26Allahabad19Pune18Amritsar13Indore12Chandigarh12Chennai12Rajkot11Lucknow11Bangalore9Agra9Raipur7Guwahati5Dehradun5Surat5Cochin4Panaji3Visakhapatnam2Jodhpur2Patna1SC1Jabalpur1Varanasi1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income4Section 69B2Section 271(1)(c)2Section 402Penalty2Business Income2Unexplained Cash Credit2TDS2Disallowance

SRI. GEORGE MATHEW,COCHIN vs. THE ITO, COCHIN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 251/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preetha S. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT-DR
Section 40

u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for not effecting TDS from the expenses under the head -'Design & CAS expenses', Salary & allowances, Godown rent and professional charges. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in considering the issue on the basis of details provided by the assessee, as the break-up of expenses furnished by the assessee

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. SRI. GEORGE MATHEW, COCHIN

In the result, appeal of the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

2
Natural Justice2
ITA 220/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuteam Sustain Cr Building Vs. Plot No. 71, Mra I.S. Press Rod Kakkanadu, Kochi 682030 Kochi 682018 Pan – Adwpm1819L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Preetha S. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shantam Bose, CIT-DR
Section 40

u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for not effecting TDS from the expenses under the head -'Design & CAS expenses', Salary & allowances, Godown rent and professional charges. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in considering the issue on the basis of details provided by the assessee, as the break-up of expenses furnished by the assessee

TOWNHOMES VILLAS AND APPARTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 163/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee before us submitted that the AO has made an addition for Rs.3,49,00,000/- under the provisions of section 69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the Townhomes Villas and partments Pvt Ltd. reasoning that the assessee

TOWNHOMES VILLAS AND APARTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee before us submitted that the AO has made an addition for Rs.3,49,00,000/- under the provisions of section 69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the Townhomes Villas and partments Pvt Ltd. reasoning that the assessee