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.

28 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 14clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,284Mumbai1,076Jaipur358Ahmedabad313Hyderabad239Bangalore221Chennai214Indore193Pune167Raipur166Surat161Kolkata161Chandigarh126Rajkot108Amritsar85Nagpur77Cochin52Allahabad51Lucknow45Visakhapatnam44Cuttack33Patna29Guwahati28Dehradun27Ranchi24Agra16Panaji16Jodhpur15Jabalpur8Varanasi4

Key Topics

Section 25030Section 10(26)30Section 271(1)24Section 271(1)(c)21Addition to Income18Section 271A17Penalty17Section 27116Section 153A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. HITECH CONSTRUCTION, DHUBRI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 133/GTY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271 uses the word "may' and not "shall". The word "may" cannot be equated with "shall" especially in penalty proceedings. Using the word "may', which is discretionary in nature, gives a discretion to the assessing officer to levy or not to levy the penalty even if the assessee had made some default under the said provision. Whether any penalty should

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

15
Section 143(3)11
Disallowance7
Cash Deposit6

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. HITECH CONSTRUCTION, DHUBRI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 135/GTY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271 uses the word "may' and not "shall". The word "may" cannot be equated with "shall" especially in penalty proceedings. Using the word "may', which is discretionary in nature, gives a discretion to the assessing officer to levy or not to levy the penalty even if the assessee had made some default under the said provision. Whether any penalty should

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. HITECH CONSTRUCTION, DHUBRI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 134/GTY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 250Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271 uses the word "may' and not "shall". The word "may" cannot be equated with "shall" especially in penalty proceedings. Using the word "may', which is discretionary in nature, gives a discretion to the assessing officer to levy or not to levy the penalty even if the assessee had made some default under the said provision. Whether any penalty should

SHREEMATI KENE WELLY,ITANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the assessees in I

ITA 179/GTY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 10(26)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Guwahati-1, Guwahati [in short ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 24.09.2020. 2. The assessees are in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: “1. For that the penalty order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

SHRI TAKING WELLY,ITANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- NORTH LAKHIMPUR, NORTH LAKHIMPUR

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the assessees in I

ITA 175/GTY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 10(26)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Guwahati-1, Guwahati [in short ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 24.09.2020. 2. The assessees are in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: “1. For that the penalty order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

BHAGYA KALITA,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 257/GTY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 271A

271(1)(c) of the Act but the principle enunciated is equally applicable to section 271AAB of the Act as well as the nature of the default is not only similar but also more severe. Since penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act is not included in section 273B of the Act, once the facts are on record that the case

BHAGYA KALITA,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 256/GTY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati29 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 271A

271(1)(c) of the Act but the principle enunciated is equally applicable to section 271AAB of the Act as well as the nature of the default is not only similar but also more severe. Since penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act is not included in section 273B of the Act, once the facts are on record that the case

M/S. ASSAM TEA CORPORATION LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 85/GTY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

14. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Now, we take up I.T.A. No.: 85/GTY/2020. 15. The present appeal is a penalty appeal. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(A) has erred in initiating the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Sub-Section

M/S. ASSAM TEA CORPORATION LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 216/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Sri Girish Agrawal

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 150(1)Section 150(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

14. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Now, we take up I.T.A. No.: 85/GTY/2020. 15. The present appeal is a penalty appeal. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT(A) has erred in initiating the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Sub-Section

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR JAJODIA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SHILLONG

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

ITA 35/GTY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 274

14,15,910/-. The proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act read with Section 274 was initiated on 22.11.2018. Thereafter the notice was issued u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act on 09.01.2019 to the assessee to explain as to why penalty

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR JAJODIA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SHILLONG

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

ITA 36/GTY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 274

14,15,910/-. The proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act read with Section 274 was initiated on 22.11.2018. Thereafter the notice was issued u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act on 09.01.2019 to the assessee to explain as to why penalty

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR JAJODIA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SHILLONG

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

ITA 37/GTY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 274

14,15,910/-. The proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act read with Section 274 was initiated on 22.11.2018. Thereafter the notice was issued u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act on 09.01.2019 to the assessee to explain as to why penalty

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR JAJODIA,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SHILLONG

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

ITA 34/GTY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)Section 274

14,15,910/-. The proceedings u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act read with Section 274 was initiated on 22.11.2018. Thereafter the notice was issued u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act on 09.01.2019 to the assessee to explain as to why penalty

SHYAMASHREE FINVEST (P) LTD,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD7(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 106/GTY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 124Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271Section 68

penalty of Rs. 1,16,71,115/- made by the assessing officer U/s 271 (1)(c) on account of unverifiable investment. 2. That your appellant craves leave of your honour to take additional ground or grounds of appeal or to modify any grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.” 3. First we take up the quantum appeal

SHYAMASHREE FINVEST (P) LTD,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD7(3), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 105/GTY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 124Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271Section 68

penalty of Rs. 1,16,71,115/- made by the assessing officer U/s 271 (1)(c) on account of unverifiable investment. 2. That your appellant craves leave of your honour to take additional ground or grounds of appeal or to modify any grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.” 3. First we take up the quantum appeal

NYANYA GOLLO,ITANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TEZPUR

In the result, ITA No. 110/Gau/2020 is allowed and ITA No

ITA 110/GTY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 10(26)Section 250Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(c)

14,44,929/- (8% of Rs.1,80,61,610/-) is allowed as exempted income under section 10(26) of the Act. Therefore, addition made by the AO, to the tune of Rs. 14.44,929/- is deleted and the balance addition of Rs. 29,08,124/- is confirmed. Apart from the above, as noted above, the Appellant has grossly failed

NYANYA GOLLO,ITANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TEZPUR

In the result, ITA No. 110/Gau/2020 is allowed and ITA No

ITA 167/GTY/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati06 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 10(26)Section 250Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(c)

14,44,929/- (8% of Rs.1,80,61,610/-) is allowed as exempted income under section 10(26) of the Act. Therefore, addition made by the AO, to the tune of Rs. 14.44,929/- is deleted and the balance addition of Rs. 29,08,124/- is confirmed. Apart from the above, as noted above, the Appellant has grossly failed

TOSHEVI KEDITSU SEMA,KOHIMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 241/GTY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 149Section 250Section 69A

14,436.00 under the head Income from Other Sources in as much as the income of the appellant is exempt u/s 10(26) of the Act. 4. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not accepting the claim of exemption of the appellant u/s 10(26) of the Act.” 3. We shall first take up the appeal

TOSHEVI KEDITSU SEMA,KOHIMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 242/GTY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati11 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10(26)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 149Section 250Section 69A

14,436.00 under the head Income from Other Sources in as much as the income of the appellant is exempt u/s 10(26) of the Act. 4. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not accepting the claim of exemption of the appellant u/s 10(26) of the Act.” 3. We shall first take up the appeal

A.C.I.T., CIRCLE -1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. SEEMA HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the cross objections by the assessee are allowed

ITA 83/GTY/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 80/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Potential Vincom Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati Vs Private Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) C.O. No. 22/Gty/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Potential Vincom Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Tax, Central Circle-1, Guwahati Limited 5/1, 3Rd Floor Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaecp7667D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

Section 250

14 Assessing Officer and filed all the details comprising ITRs, share application forms, audited accounts, certificates of incorporation, bank statements, source of funds and also the copy of assessment order/assessment intimation. We observe that all these details are available from page no. 53 to 1838 of the paper book filed before us. We note that the assessee has even filed