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.

83 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 172(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai90Delhi83Jaipur49Raipur35Indore24Allahabad21Chennai20Amritsar11Kolkata9Nagpur7Chandigarh7Hyderabad6Bangalore6Lucknow6Patna6Guwahati5Pune5Ahmedabad3Dehradun3Jodhpur3Cuttack2Rajkot2Surat1Varanasi1Visakhapatnam1

Key Topics

Section 271C62Section 143(3)41Section 153A34Penalty33Addition to Income31Section 194C29Section 153D29TDS24Deduction24Survey u/s 133A

BRIJ GOPAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 4800/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 1Section 143Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 270A(2)(a)

penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the facts and 10 circumstances of the case. This reference is accordingly answered in the affirmative holding that the Tribunal was justified in doing so." xi) ITA No. 393/2015 Pr CIT vs. Prashant Shrivastava "11. It is not the Revenue's case that

JET LITE (INDIA) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6 (NOW CC-1), MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

21
Section 133A17
Section 25012

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 839/DEL/2019[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmajet Lite (India) Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 13, Community Central Circle-6, Centre, Yusuf Sarai, (Now Cc-1), New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadcs4480L

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT DR
Section 156Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

172 Taxman 386 (SC) that provision of Explanation 4 appended to section 271 of the IT Act, 1961 as amended by the Finance Act, 2002 with effect from 1-4-2003 is applicable with the retrospective effect. Therefore, the AO has correctly rejected the second plea of the appellate. Jet Lite (India) Ltd 6.5 In view of the above discussion

PARAMOUNT VILLAS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3446/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshparamount Villas Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Jcit, 208, Second Floor, Sikkha Range-76, Mansion Lsc, Savita New Delhi Vihar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aagcm6447E

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 272(2)(g)Section 272A(2)(g)Section 275(1)

172 161 12,45,000/- 16A Q2 Form 30.10.2012 15.02.2013 108 140 7,69,400/- 16A Q3 Form 30.01.2013 16.02.2013 17 129 1,83,124/- 16A Q4 Form 30.05.2013 18.06.2013 19 171 2,61,838/- 16A Total 24,59,362/- 5. As stated earlier, since the TDS remittance details and challan numbers are to be reflected in the TDS Certificate

VATIKA SOVEREIGN PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 7252/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.7251 & 7252/Del/2019 (Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vatika Sovereign Park Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, 621A, 6Th Floor, Devika Towers Circle-26(1) 6-Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi-110019 Pan No. Aafcp9383D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld Sr. Advocate submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when the payments are made to the Government or local

VATIKA SOVEREIGN PARK PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 7251/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.7251 & 7252/Del/2019 (Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vatika Sovereign Park Private Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, 621A, 6Th Floor, Devika Towers Circle-26(1) 6-Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi-110019 Pan No. Aafcp9383D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld Sr. Advocate submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when the payments are made to the Government or local

PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE 76, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and penalty imposed by the A

ITA 6262/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 6262/Del/2019 (A.Y 2017-18)

Section 143(3)Section 271

4. The Ld. A.O. was of the opinion that HUDA is taxable entity who was rendering services for External Development Work and receiving the consideration for such services, in view of Circular No, 681 of CBDT dated 08/03/1994, the TDS was applicable on EDC charges. Thereafter, the AO has reproduced various circulars dated 15.01.2002, 08.07.2002, 25.09.2009 and 14.08.1996 issued

PIVOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,GURGAON vs. ADDI. CIT SPL. RANGE 76, NEW DELHI

The appeal are allowed

ITA 6261/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 6261/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. As case was called for hearing on 12/7/22 none appeared for the appellant. The report of registry shows notice stand issued on 17/10/19. As the issue involved has been examined on various occasion by co-ordinates benches. No further notice is required. Arguments of Pivotal Infrastructure Ltd. Ld Sr. DR were heard who submitted

VIRESH PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7436/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.7436/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271C

172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's I.T.A.No.7436/Del/2019 appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271- C." 3. Being

TS REALTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT RANGE -76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 4941/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4940/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 4941/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 4942/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18 T.S. Realtech Private Vs. Acit, Limited Range-76 E-26, Panchsheel Park New Delhi New Delhi – 110017 Pan : Aadck3222C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271Section 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld. AR submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when the payments are made to the Government or local authority

TS REALTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT RANGE -76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 4942/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4940/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 4941/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 4942/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18 T.S. Realtech Private Vs. Acit, Limited Range-76 E-26, Panchsheel Park New Delhi New Delhi – 110017 Pan : Aadck3222C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271Section 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld. AR submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when the payments are made to the Government or local authority

TS REALTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT RANGE -76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 4940/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4940/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No. 4941/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No. 4942/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18 T.S. Realtech Private Vs. Acit, Limited Range-76 E-26, Panchsheel Park New Delhi New Delhi – 110017 Pan : Aadck3222C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271Section 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld. AR submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when the payments are made to the Government or local authority

DCIT CIRCLE-76(1), NEW DELHI vs. OMAXE LTD. , NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue/Department stands

ITA 9282/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 194CSection 250Section 271C

4. That the order of CIT(A) is being bad in law and erroneous in nature. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend any one or more of the ground of appeal as stated above as and when need for doing so may arise.” 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record

REGARDS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-78, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6535/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 6535/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Regards Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 895, Nai Sarak, Range-78, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccr5651D Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.11.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Nargas, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 194CSection 196Section 271CSection 40

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. At the time of arguments, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated at Bar, that ground no. 3 is not pressed and submitted that ground no. 1 is covered by judgments of Co-ordinate Benches. In regard to ground no. 2 it was submitted that Ld. Tax Authorities have failed to appreciate that

SHYAM COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-77, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2020/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad:Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 119Section 194CSection 196Section 271C

271-C in the case of Itochu Corporation 268 ITR 172 8 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India 8 ITA No.2020/Del./2023 Ltd., we allow the assessee

TULIP INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6736/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6734/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.6735/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Ita No.6736/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. ITA No. 6734 & Ors. Tulip Infratech Pvt. Ltd. 6 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld Sr. Advocate submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when

TULIP INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6735/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6734/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.6735/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Ita No.6736/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. ITA No. 6734 & Ors. Tulip Infratech Pvt. Ltd. 6 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld Sr. Advocate submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when

TULIP INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, SPECIAL RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6734/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6734/Del/2019, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.6735/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 Ita No.6736/Del/2019, A.Y. 2017-18

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. ITA No. 6734 & Ors. Tulip Infratech Pvt. Ltd. 6 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld Sr. Advocate submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

The appeals are allowed

ITA 6653/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmatdi Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Addl. Cit, 10, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Marg, Range-76, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi- 110001 Pan : Aaaci5799P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133ASection 194CSection 271C

4. Heard and perused the record. 5. On behalf of the assessee the Ld Sr. Advocate submitted that the payments made to HUDA were only for the purpose of facilitating the payments due on account of EDC charges towards Town and Country Planning, Government of Haryana. It was submitted that when the payments are made to the Government or local

PRAGATI POWER CORPORATION LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

penalty, in case of failure by the DISCOMS to pay its dues within the period as specified by DERC. When the principal amount of bills towards sale of electricity itself is due then there is no basis for making out a case that LPSC payable by the customers would be collectible with certainty. J) the other CPSUs such as NTPC

TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDI. CIT RANGE-76, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5871/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri [Dr.] B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: [CIT] - D. R
Section 196Section 271C

172 (Del) and in the case of CIT v. Mitsui & Company Ltd. 272 ITR 545. Respectfully following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the decision of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Television Eighteen India Ltd., we allow the assessee's appeal and cancel the penalty as levied u/s 271-C." 3. Being aggrieved