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.

28 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 148clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,274Delhi1,206Jaipur402Ahmedabad370Surat260Pune253Bangalore227Kolkata227Chennai210Indore178Hyderabad175Chandigarh151Rajkot138Karnataka128Raipur96Visakhapatnam66Amritsar63Lucknow59Allahabad53Agra42Nagpur41Patna40Cochin38Calcutta35Cuttack29Guwahati28Dehradun19Jabalpur17Jodhpur15Panaji10Varanasi4Ranchi3SC3Rajasthan2Telangana2Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 153C42Section 153A27Section 25022Section 271A17Section 14416Addition to Income16Section 271(1)(c)15Section 27114Section 14811

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(1)(c) - income disclosed by the assessee under Section 153A - assessee has filed revised returns disclosing higher income than in the original return - HELD THAT:- AO has not brought anything on record to assess any income over and above the returned Page 11 of 23 I.T.A. Nos.: 133, 134 & 135/GTY/2020 AYs: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/s. Hitech

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

Penalty11
Search & Seizure11
Depreciation5

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(1)(c) - income disclosed by the assessee under Section 153A - assessee has filed revised returns disclosing higher income than in the original return - HELD THAT:- AO has not brought anything on record to assess any income over and above the returned Page 11 of 23 I.T.A. Nos.: 133, 134 & 135/GTY/2020 AYs: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/s. Hitech

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(1)(c) - income disclosed by the assessee under Section 153A - assessee has filed revised returns disclosing higher income than in the original return - HELD THAT:- AO has not brought anything on record to assess any income over and above the returned Page 11 of 23 I.T.A. Nos.: 133, 134 & 135/GTY/2020 AYs: 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/s. Hitech

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 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,- (a) “specified date” means

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 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A). (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,- (a) “specified date” means

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - AGARTALA , AGARTALA vs. SHRI SUBHAJIT PAUL, AGARTALA

In the result, cross-objection nos

ITA 116/GTY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati31 Jul 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.116/Gau/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Rockein Saikia, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Modi, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153D

271(1)(c)/271AAB is to be initiated after careful consideration. Keep proper note, i.e. your satisfaction for initiation of penalty quoting proper section under which penalty proceedings are initiated. Penalty notice is to be issued specifying proper section & served upon the assessee. 4. Sentence regarding approval u/s. 153D is to be mentioned in “note not for the assessee

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 22/GTY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) in appeal ITA No.300/Gau/2018; respectively. 2. Learned counsel’s first and foremost plea during the course of hearing is that the assessee’s appeal(s) ITA No.20-24/Gau/2019 raise identical legal issue challenging initiation of sec. 153C proceedings on account of lack of Assessing Officer’s “satisfaction” as prescribed under the law. We make it clear that

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 23/GTY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) in appeal ITA No.300/Gau/2018; respectively. 2. Learned counsel’s first and foremost plea during the course of hearing is that the assessee’s appeal(s) ITA No.20-24/Gau/2019 raise identical legal issue challenging initiation of sec. 153C proceedings on account of lack of Assessing Officer’s “satisfaction” as prescribed under the law. We make it clear that

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 24/GTY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) in appeal ITA No.300/Gau/2018; respectively. 2. Learned counsel’s first and foremost plea during the course of hearing is that the assessee’s appeal(s) ITA No.20-24/Gau/2019 raise identical legal issue challenging initiation of sec. 153C proceedings on account of lack of Assessing Officer’s “satisfaction” as prescribed under the law. We make it clear that

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 25/GTY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) in appeal ITA No.300/Gau/2018; respectively. 2. Learned counsel’s first and foremost plea during the course of hearing is that the assessee’s appeal(s) ITA No.20-24/Gau/2019 raise identical legal issue challenging initiation of sec. 153C proceedings on account of lack of Assessing Officer’s “satisfaction” as prescribed under the law. We make it clear that

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 20/GTY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) in appeal ITA No.300/Gau/2018; respectively. 2. Learned counsel’s first and foremost plea during the course of hearing is that the assessee’s appeal(s) ITA No.20-24/Gau/2019 raise identical legal issue challenging initiation of sec. 153C proceedings on account of lack of Assessing Officer’s “satisfaction” as prescribed under the law. We make it clear that

SHRI SUBRATA KUMAR SAHA,AGARTALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA

Appeals are allowed in above terms

ITA 21/GTY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati02 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) in appeal ITA No.300/Gau/2018; respectively. 2. Learned counsel’s first and foremost plea during the course of hearing is that the assessee’s appeal(s) ITA No.20-24/Gau/2019 raise identical legal issue challenging initiation of sec. 153C proceedings on account of lack of Assessing Officer’s “satisfaction” as prescribed under the law. We make it clear that

JAY KISHAN MANDAL,NAGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NAGAON

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

ITA 52/GTY/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.51 & 52/Gty/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Jay Kishan Mandal Ito, Ward-1, Nagaon C/O. Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H. No. 15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Vs Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. Pan: Ajupm 6794 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 16.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Both Dated 26.08.2021 In Respect Of Assessment Year 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. The Assessee Has Raised Common Grounds Of Appeal For Each Of The Assessment Years Under Consideration: “I. That The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Was Not Justified While Confirming The Penalty Imposed U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Ii. That The Appellant Prays Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Delete Or Forego Any Of The Grounds Either Before Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 144Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

148 of the Act. In response to such query made by the AO, the assessee submitted that the income filed by him was due to mistake in taking salary income correctly and he surrendered the difference amount for taxation. The Assessing Officer has also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and imposed penalty

JAY KISHAN MANDAL,NAGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NAGAON

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

ITA 51/GTY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos.51 & 52/Gty/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Jay Kishan Mandal Ito, Ward-1, Nagaon C/O. Rahul Raj Jain & Co., H. No. 15, 1St Floor, Bye Lane-2, Vs Shaktigarh Path, Bhangagarh, G.S. Road, Assam-781005. Pan: Ajupm 6794 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri N.T. Sherpa, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 16.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Captioned Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Both Dated 26.08.2021 In Respect Of Assessment Year 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. The Assessee Has Raised Common Grounds Of Appeal For Each Of The Assessment Years Under Consideration: “I. That The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Was Not Justified While Confirming The Penalty Imposed U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. Ii. That The Appellant Prays Leave To Add, Amend, Alter, Delete Or Forego Any Of The Grounds Either Before Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT
Section 144Section 148Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

148 of the Act. In response to such query made by the AO, the assessee submitted that the income filed by him was due to mistake in taking salary income correctly and he surrendered the difference amount for taxation. The Assessing Officer has also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and imposed penalty

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- JORHAT, JORHAT vs. M/S. TOOR FINANCE COMPANY LTD,, JORHAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 305/GTY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are being initiated separately. (Addition of Rs.8,94,55,000/-“. 11. The name of four accommodation providers, which has been discussed in the reasons for reopening is not discernable in this list of seventeen entities. Therefore, these concerns have not been demonstrated by the ld. Assessing Officer as connected in any manner

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 314/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

Section 10(26)Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/GTY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

Section 10(26)Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/GTY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

Section 10(26)Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

LALTHANGVELI PACHUAU,AIZAWL vs. ITO W-1 SILCHAR , SILCHAR

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 313/GTY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati16 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Assessment Order & Penalty Orders As Under:

Section 10(26)Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

271(1)(c) 18.08.25 42 days Penalty of Rs. 50,88,576/- A.Y. 2015-16 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information with the income tax department the assessee has deposited substantial amount of cash in his savings bank accounts in SBI Madame Cama Road, Mumbai but did not file return of income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. POTENCIAL VINCOM (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 80/GTY/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati01 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

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

148 of the Act on 23/03/2017, after the Assessing Officer received information from DDIT (Inv.) Unit 2(2), Guwahati (hereinafter the ‘DIT (Inv.)’), To the effect that the assessee has received share capital and share premium to the tune of Rs.41,43,00,000/- from paper companies having no real business of their own and the money receipt was only