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.

10 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 44Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai20Delhi10

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)18Penalty10Section 144C(13)9Addition to Income8Section 44D7Section 143(3)6Section 144C6Double Taxation/DTAA6Section 234A5Section 234B5Permanent Establishment5Section 1543

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE GURGAON , GURUGRAM vs. LUMMUS TECHNOLOGY HEAT TRASFER BV- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8919/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 44D

44D on gross basis by holding that the fact of subsequent years 2008-09 and 2009-10 were similar to this assessment year. 3. Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on rejecting the Transfer Pricing adjustment

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE GURGAON , GURUGRAM vs. LUMMUS TECHNOLOGY HEAT TRASFER BV- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8917/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 44D

44D on gross basis by holding that the fact of subsequent years 2008-09 and 2009-10 were similar to this assessment year. 3. Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on rejecting the Transfer Pricing adjustment

DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE GURGAON , GURUGRAM vs. LUMMUS TECHNOLOGY HEAT TRASFER BV- INDIA BRANCH OFFICE , GURGAON

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8918/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 44D

44D on gross basis by holding that the fact of subsequent years 2008-09 and 2009-10 were similar to this assessment year. 3. Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the penalty U/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on rejecting the Transfer Pricing adjustment

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2)(1), INT. TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

ITA 2305/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44B

u/s 44BB. It is settled proposition that unless Revenue is able to prove that the assessee has a PE in India, its business profits cannot be subject to tax in India. This view is supported by ITAT decision in the case of R&B Falcon Offshore Ltd. In this case, ITAT clearly held that in absence of a PE, section

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. ACIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

ITA 2091/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44B

u/s 44BB. It is settled proposition that unless Revenue is able to prove that the assessee has a PE in India, its business profits cannot be subject to tax in India. This view is supported by ITAT decision in the case of R&B Falcon Offshore Ltd. In this case, ITAT clearly held that in absence of a PE, section

COMPUTER MODELLING GROUP LIMITED,CANADA vs. DCIT CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 1(2)(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for AY 2012-13,

ITA 2090/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 153Section 234ASection 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 44B

u/s 44BB. It is settled proposition that unless Revenue is able to prove that the assessee has a PE in India, its business profits cannot be subject to tax in India. This view is supported by ITAT decision in the case of R&B Falcon Offshore Ltd. In this case, ITAT clearly held that in absence of a PE, section

AIR FRANCE ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1)(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1004/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c)/271A & 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) and ground No. 20 pertains to levy of interest under section 254 of the Act. ITA No. 1004/ Del/2020 3. At the very outset, the Ld. AR submitted that it is a matter covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee

LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GMBH,GURGAON vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 784/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Satyam Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for Assessment Year 2009-10, which is inappropriate. 5. Not granting credits for withholding taxes deducted by customers amounting to Rs 14,940,910. The Appellant submits that each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice to one another. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit

M/S. LAHMEYER INTERNATIONAL GMBH,GERMANY vs. DDIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 5634/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Satyam Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vedanshu Tripathi, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for Assessment Year 2009-10, which is inappropriate. 5. Not granting credits for withholding taxes deducted by customers amounting to Rs 14,940,910. The Appellant submits that each of the above grounds is independent and without prejudice to one another. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, vary, omit

VIVEK CHANDELA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 976/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 44ASection 44DSection 68

penalty under section 271(1) (c) of Act. 3. That assessee craves leave to add, alter, and modify any of the grounds mentioned above.” 3. Learned AR has pointed out that the AO has relied the report of Inspector who had allegedly inspected the office of the assessee and reported that there was 3 no manufacturing process going