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.

95 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 12A(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi95Mumbai51Bangalore49Hyderabad35Calcutta34Ahmedabad30Lucknow16Jaipur16Visakhapatnam12Chandigarh11Indore9Pune9Amritsar9Allahabad8Cochin6Kolkata5Patna4Rajkot3Jodhpur2Raipur2Surat2Nagpur2

Key Topics

Section 68137Section 11107Addition to Income56Exemption53Section 12A52Section 271(1)(c)48Section 10(38)47Section 143(3)34Penalty27

INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

ITA 7599/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147(1)Section 148Section 2(15)Section 250

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5

Section 69C26
Natural Justice26
Section 143(2)20

penalty proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) separately, for furnishing false particulars of income 5. The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order partly sustained the same, by allowing the appeal of the Assesseepartly. For brevity and ready reference the concluding part is reproduced herein below:- 4 Determination 4.1 Grounds of appeal

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

ITA 166/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147(1)Section 148Section 2(15)Section 250

penalty proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) separately, for furnishing false particulars of income 5. The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order partly sustained the same, by allowing the appeal of the Assesseepartly. For brevity and ready reference the concluding part is reproduced herein below:- 4 Determination 4.1 Grounds of appeal

INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

ITA 7598/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Hemant Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 147(1)Section 148Section 2(15)Section 250

penalty proceeding u/s 271(l)(c) separately, for furnishing false particulars of income 5. The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who vide impugned order partly sustained the same, by allowing the appeal of the Assesseepartly. For brevity and ready reference the concluding part is reproduced herein below:- 4 Determination 4.1 Grounds of appeal

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT MEERA DEVI

ITA/997/2010HC Delhi23 Aug 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 132Section 153Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

u/s 271(1)(c). Since the provisions of Explanation 5 are not attracted in the case of both the assessee, penalties imposed by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be deleted in all the appeals. We order accordingly.” 8. In these circumstances, when Meera Devi’s appeals (ITA 564- 568/Del/2008) were taken up for hearing

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT MEERA DEVI

ITA/995/2010HC Delhi23 Aug 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 132Section 153Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

u/s 271(1)(c). Since the provisions of Explanation 5 are not attracted in the case of both the assessee, penalties imposed by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be deleted in all the appeals. We order accordingly.” 8. In these circumstances, when Meera Devi’s appeals (ITA 564- 568/Del/2008) were taken up for hearing

JAMNALAL BAJAJ FOUNDATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (E), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2033/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

Section 271(l)(c) of the Act issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer does not indicate the specific charge for which penalty p,, mgs were initiated. It is submitted that the Order imposing penalty u/section 271(l)(c) is vitiated and may accordingly be quashed / struck/ b / set aside as bad in law and without jurisdiction. The appellant prays that

DEHRADUN PUBLIC SCHOOL,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result ITA No. 1387/del/2016 for assessment year 2011 – 12 filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2733/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 143Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 271

2. That, the Assessing Officer has erred in issuing the penalty notice and initiating the proceedings U/s 27l(l)(c) without recording the requisite satisfaction, as required by the provision of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction and the same is erroneously uphold by the CIT(A). 3. That, the Assessing officer

INSTITUTE OF HAEMATOLOGY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), WARD- 1(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 453/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 453/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Institute Of Haematology, Vs Income Tax Officer(E), 11/6-B, Shanti Chambers, Pusa Ward-1(2), Road, New Delhi-110005 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati4626P Assessee By : Sh. T. R. Talwar, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.08.2018 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 02.08.2017 Of Ld. Cit(A)-40, Delhi. 2. The Only Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Relates To The Sustenance Of Penalty Of Rs.68,598/- Levied By The Ao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

For Appellant: Sh. T. R. Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(3)Section 164(2)Section 271(1)(c)

2 Institute of Haematology it had neither furnished inaccurate particulars nor concealed particulars of its income as the advances given to the specified persons were duly mentioned in the Audit Report. Therefore, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was not leviable. The AO did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee and observed that

SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3659/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

ACIT (E), CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4049/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

ACIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3648/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3658/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

ACIT (E), CIRCLE- 2(1), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 4207/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. DIT(E), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3082/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

SERVANTS OF PEOPLE SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. DIT(E), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3081/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

ACIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3649/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11(3)

12A of the Act. The effect of the amendment is that trusts having objects of the advancement of any other object of general public utility end use of business profit for charitable purposes is of no relevance due to amendment in section 2(15) of the Act. 3.4 Evidently the activities of the assessee of running newspaper printing has characteristics

ITO (E), NEW DELHI vs. BHAI HOSPITAL TRUST, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 763/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. C. M. Garg & Sh. N.K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2007-08 Ito (E) Bhai Hospital Trust Trust Ward-Iii Vs 55, Hanuman Road, Laxmi Nagar Distt. Centre Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi-1100001 Pan No.Aaatb0492M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 80G

u/s. 12A ; in terms of requirements of section 2(15) and further conditionalities of sections 11,12 and 13 of the I.T.Act. Accordingly the benefits of Section 11 and 12 are denied to the assessee. ii) By holding the shares of M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. at the value of Rs.58,48,281/- as investment, the assessee has violated the provisions

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-I, NEW DELHI vs. M/S ACI WIRELESS LTD

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/313/2013HC Delhi10 Dec 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP with Ms. Monica Gupta and Ms. Nidhi

12A, Panchkula. It is the case of the prosecution that D-3 was prepared at the instance of A-44, Rekha Sharma, who was a member of the Selection Committee, Panchkula. ii) PW-20 Hitesh Bansal has testified that in 2004 the IO, R.N. Azad inquired from him about the computer job which he had done for Rekha Sharma during

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX: DELHI-V vs. RITES LTD.

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/295/2013HC Delhi06 Dec 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP with Ms. Monica Gupta and Ms. Nidhi

12A, Panchkula. It is the case of the prosecution that D-3 was prepared at the instance of A-44, Rekha Sharma, who was a member of the Selection Committee, Panchkula. ii) PW-20 Hitesh Bansal has testified that in 2004 the IO, R.N. Azad inquired from him about the computer job which he had done for Rekha Sharma during

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX : DELHI -V vs. RITED LTD.

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/293/2013HC Delhi06 Dec 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

For Appellant: Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP with Ms. Monica Gupta and Ms. Nidhi

12A, Panchkula. It is the case of the prosecution that D-3 was prepared at the instance of A-44, Rekha Sharma, who was a member of the Selection Committee, Panchkula. ii) PW-20 Hitesh Bansal has testified that in 2004 the IO, R.N. Azad inquired from him about the computer job which he had done for Rekha Sharma during