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.

22 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 69Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur86Chandigarh28Mumbai25Ahmedabad24Indore22Delhi22Pune21Surat21Bangalore20Chennai7Jabalpur5Cochin4Hyderabad3Kolkata2Allahabad2Amritsar2Raipur2Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)14Section 69B9Section 153A7Section 1436Penalty6Section 271(1)(c)5Section 1475Addition to Income5Section 2714Unexplained Investment

PRATEEK GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. PR, CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 785/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16 Prateek Gupta, Vs. Pr. Cit 152, Chanderpuri, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201001 Pan Atbpg8602J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3(i) That on facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT was not justified in directing the assessing officer to re-compute tax liability in accordance with section 115BBE of the Act even though the computation of tax in the assessment order is neither erroneous

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

3
Section 142(1)2
Short Term Capital Gains2

M/S. H.B. LEASING & FINANCE COMPANY LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2323/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshand, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) on the impugned enhancement on account of allegedly wrong claim of losses and understatement of income attributable to derivative transactions for Assessment Year 2009-10 in question. 2. We shall first take up the quantum appeal in ITA No.2323/Del/2015 for adjudication purposes. I.T.As.2323 & 5089/Del/2015 2 ITA No.2323/Del/2015 for Assessment Year

M/S H.B. LEASING & FINANCE COMPANY LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5089/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshand, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) on the impugned enhancement on account of allegedly wrong claim of losses and understatement of income attributable to derivative transactions for Assessment Year 2009-10 in question. 2. We shall first take up the quantum appeal in ITA No.2323/Del/2015 for adjudication purposes. I.T.As.2323 & 5089/Del/2015 2 ITA No.2323/Del/2015 for Assessment Year

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI vs. MAMTA AGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6185/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. KMS ASSOCIATES LLP (ERSTWHILE M/S. KMS ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6179/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19 , NEW DELHI vs. MURLI INFRATECH LLP (ERSTWHILE M/S. MURLI INFRATECH PVT. LTD.), DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6173/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. SUMAN AGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6181/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19 , NEW DELHI vs. RGS PRINTERS LTD. (ERSTWHILE M/S. RGS PRINTERS PVT. LTD.), DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6174/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. MADHUSUDAN PACKAGING LLP, DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6182/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. KAVITA AGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6178/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. MURLI AGRITECH LLP (ERSTWHILE M/S. MURLI AGRITECH PVT. LTD.), DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6175/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

GOPAL AGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 5854/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. RAJ GOPAL AGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6171/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. SABHYATA AGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6183/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19 , NEW DELHI vs. SHIV KUMAR AGARWAL, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6186/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. SHRI GOPAL AGARWAL , NEW DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6930/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 19, NEW DELHI vs. MRS PROJECTS LLP, DELHI

In the result, all the Departmental Appeals and Cross Objections of the Assessee and Appeal of assessee in the case of Shri Gopal Agarwal in ITA

ITA 6187/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

69B of the I T Act, 1961 and is added to the total income of the assessee for the year under consideration. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 have been initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars. (Addition: Rs. 1,96,02,000/-)” 4. Before the Ld. CIT (A) apart from merits, it was submitted

M/S. D.S. DOORS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 38/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.Anadi Nath Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69B

u/s 271(1)(c) has been upheld. 2. The Ld.AR submitted that the penalty proceedings in the facts of the present case become infructuous. Inviting attention to the consolidated order dated 12.03.2015 in ITA No.1986 to 1991 & 2053/Del/2011 alongwith ITA Nos.2273 to 2275 & 2052/Del/2011 pertaining to 2001-02 to 2006-07 & 2007-08 alongwith

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S PACL INDIA LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purposes, whereas appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3779/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153A

u/s 69B of the Income tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the C1T (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,78,28,308/- made by the A.O. on account of consultancy charges (commission/ brokerage). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

PACL INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purposes, whereas appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2894/DEL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kant

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153A

u/s 69B of the Income tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the C1T (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,78,28,308/- made by the A.O. on account of consultancy charges (commission/ brokerage). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case