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.

4 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 272A(2)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Indore47Chennai44Mumbai32Surat28Cuttack16Bangalore14Jaipur10Kolkata6Visakhapatnam6Rajkot6Delhi4Jabalpur3Chandigarh3Pune3Ahmedabad2Nagpur2Allahabad2Raipur2Guwahati1Cochin1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Section 92E6Section 272A(2)(g)5Section 69A3Penalty3Section 133(6)2Section 142(1)2Section 2712Cash Deposit2Addition to Income

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)

272A(2)(g) (in ates deductees Rs.) A. B. C. D. E. F. G.* Q1 Form 30.07.2012 18.01.2013 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

2

MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, LTU, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7087/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 7087/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., Vs Dcit, 5Th Floor, Mds, 9, Cgo Complex, Circle-1, Ltu Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0828R Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. B. M. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.11.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.02.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. B. M. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271BSection 92E

e-tendering, cyber café services and sale of ISP packs & Anmol Cards. 3 Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. 4. The AO levied penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- u/s 271BA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of non-filing of report of accountant as required u/s 92E of the Act. 5. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order

ITO, WARD- 12(3), NEW DELHI vs. INTEGRA TELECOMMUNICATION & SOFTWARE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4260/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

e) Show Cause Notice u/s 142(1) dated 14/03/2016. 5. Final show cause notice served upon the assessee is re- produced below: Office of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(3), Room No. 420-B, C. R. Building, I. P. Estate, New Delhi -110002. TIME BARRING MATTER FINAL OPPORTUNITY F. No. ITO/Ward-12(3)/75/2015-16/ Dated: 14.03.2016 PAN No. AAACI9473Q

TALHA KHAN,MOHALLA AFGANAN PO AMROHA vs. ADDL.JT.DY.ACIT.NFAC, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) DELHI

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

ITA 3419/DEL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Nov 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Vimal Kumara.Yr. : 2017-18 Talha Khan, Vs. National Faceless Mohalla Afganan Po Amroha, Appeal Centre (Nfac), Amroha-244221 Delhi Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Ejspk7379K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Vibhu Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 271FSection 69A

penalty show cause and other notices und section 271F, 271A ; 271B, 271 AAC[1], 272A[1][d] and wrongly assessed income and the head from other sources in place of business income. 2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 71 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The reasonable cause for the same