BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

6 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Unexplained Investmentclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi328Mumbai312Jaipur153Ahmedabad137Hyderabad110Indore85Chennai66Pune64Surat62Kolkata50Rajkot48Bangalore45Chandigarh32Allahabad24Amritsar23Raipur23Nagpur16Ranchi12Lucknow11Visakhapatnam10Patna10Agra8Guwahati7Jodhpur6Jabalpur6Dehradun6Cuttack2

Key Topics

Section 1488Section 271(1)(c)6Section 69A6Penalty6Section 694Addition to Income4Section 1443Unexplained Investment3Section 1472

SMT. NIDHI YADAV,DEHRADUN vs. ITO- W-2(1)(4),, RUDRAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 115/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.115/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.117/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2015-16 Nidhi Yadav, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-801, Forest Residency, Ward 2(1)(4), Dehradun, Uttarakhand Income Tax Office, Pin Code: 248014 Rudrapur, Uttarakhand Pan: Acapy5157E (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Mohit Dev, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amarpal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

unexplained investment and added u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the total income of the F.Y. under consideration and charged for tax u/s 115BBE of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271

Section 115B2
Section 271(1)2
Reopening of Assessment2

MRS. NIDHI YADAV,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, RUDRAPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 117/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.115/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2013-14 Ita No.117/Ddn/2024, A.Y. 2015-16 Nidhi Yadav, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-801, Forest Residency, Ward 2(1)(4), Dehradun, Uttarakhand Income Tax Office, Pin Code: 248014 Rudrapur, Uttarakhand Pan: Acapy5157E (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Mohit Dev, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amarpal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Common Facts & Similar Grounds Arise In The Above Captioned Appeals Of The Assessee; Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

unexplained investment and added u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the total income of the F.Y. under consideration and charged for tax u/s 115BBE of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271

RAVINDER KUMAR AGARWAL,RISHIKESH vs. CIT(A)-3, NOIDA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 203/DDN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun30 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 203/Ddn/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Ravinder Kumar Agarwal, Vs Cit(A)-3, A. R. T.O. Complex, 2Nd M/S Agarwal Jewellers, Mukherji Road, Rishikesh, Floor, Sector-33, Uttarakhand-249201 Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abjpa9045P Assessee By : Sh. Nitish Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.01.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2013-14, Arises Against The Cit(A)-3, Noida’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2025-26/1079253888(1) Dated 04.08.2025, In Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Heard Both The Parties At Length. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Sh. Nitish Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 271(1)(c)

penalty involves quantum addition of unexplained investment which the assessee could not plead and prove despite having led voluminous detailed evidence, such an instance could not held to be covered under either of the foregoing two limbs attracting u/s 271

ASSITANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , DEHRADUN vs. POWER MACHINES, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 133/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ansaul Sachar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mohan Lal Joshi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

271(1)(c) of the Act. 7. The Ld. AO. has erred in acknowledging the fact that the appellant has neither concealed any income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of income in respect of the addition made to warrant levy of penalty." 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed a detailed submission as under: “Ground

PANDITWARI SADHAN SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 87/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 69

u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 31.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience

PANDITWARI SADHAN SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DEHRADUN

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

ITA 88/DDN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 69

u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 31.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1(1)(2), Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. Identical issues are involved in all these appeals and hence they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience