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.

21 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 112clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi398Mumbai296Karnataka121Jaipur91Bangalore71Ahmedabad64Raipur41Chennai41Indore40Calcutta34Chandigarh27Amritsar21Kolkata21Hyderabad21Pune20Visakhapatnam16Lucknow14Panaji13Cuttack11Cochin10Surat9Allahabad7Nagpur7Rajkot6Guwahati5Jodhpur5Ranchi2SC1Rajasthan1Dehradun1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 15822Section 271A22Addition to Income16Survey u/s 133A16Section 143(2)14Section 143(3)14Section 13212Section 153A12Section 133A

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATI vs. PALAKALA GUNASEKHAR, TIRUPATI

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 757/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.Chakradhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271ASection 274

112 / 2019-20 / CIT(A)-3 / VSP / 2019-20 & 2020-21, involving proceedings u/s.271AAB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]; respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. Coming to the Revenue’s identical sole grievance seeking to revive Section 271AAB penalty of Rs.1,89,92,857/- and :- 2 -: ITA Nos.756 & 757/Hyd/2020 Rs.1

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 1278
Bogus Purchases8
Disallowance8

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI vs. PALLAM REDDY SREELAKSHMI, TIRUPATI

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 756/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jan 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.Chakradhar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 271Section 271ASection 274

112 / 2019-20 / CIT(A)-3 / VSP / 2019-20 & 2020-21, involving proceedings u/s.271AAB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]; respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. Coming to the Revenue’s identical sole grievance seeking to revive Section 271AAB penalty of Rs.1,89,92,857/- and :- 2 -: ITA Nos.756 & 757/Hyd/2020 Rs.1

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 54/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 53/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

D S R INFRASTRUCTUREPRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE- 1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 49/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 56/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 57/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

D S R INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 51/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. PIONEER BUILDERS, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 64/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD vs. DSR INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals of Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 50/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiasl.

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate for assessee at Sl.Nos.1 to 3For Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

112 (Ahmedabad-T). 4. Third party evidence without cross examination cannot form the basis of assessment. In this case the AO has utilized information against the appellant on the basis of some loose slip notings without supplying the said documents to appellant. The assessment order also does not mention about the nature of notings in the loose slips found

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 553/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for submission of inaccurate particulars of income”. 17. The learned DR has also drawn our attention to the findings given by the learned CIT (A) which is mentioned in para 7.2 of the order which reads as under: Page 20 of 34 ITA Nos 508 and others Ascend Telcom Infrastructure

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELCOM INFRASTRUTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 509/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for submission of inaccurate particulars of income”. 17. The learned DR has also drawn our attention to the findings given by the learned CIT (A) which is mentioned in para 7.2 of the order which reads as under: Page 20 of 34 ITA Nos 508 and others Ascend Telcom Infrastructure

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 554/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for submission of inaccurate particulars of income”. 17. The learned DR has also drawn our attention to the findings given by the learned CIT (A) which is mentioned in para 7.2 of the order which reads as under: Page 20 of 34 ITA Nos 508 and others Ascend Telcom Infrastructure

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 556/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for submission of inaccurate particulars of income”. 17. The learned DR has also drawn our attention to the findings given by the learned CIT (A) which is mentioned in para 7.2 of the order which reads as under: Page 20 of 34 ITA Nos 508 and others Ascend Telcom Infrastructure

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 555/HYD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for submission of inaccurate particulars of income”. 17. The learned DR has also drawn our attention to the findings given by the learned CIT (A) which is mentioned in para 7.2 of the order which reads as under: Page 20 of 34 ITA Nos 508 and others Ascend Telcom Infrastructure

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELCOM INFRASTRUTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes while the corresponding C

ITA 510/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 153A

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for submission of inaccurate particulars of income”. 17. The learned DR has also drawn our attention to the findings given by the learned CIT (A) which is mentioned in para 7.2 of the order which reads as under: Page 20 of 34 ITA Nos 508 and others Ascend Telcom Infrastructure

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED , SECUNDERABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 552/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: : Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153A/ 153C of the IT Act the AO can take into consideration material other than what was available during search and seizure operation for making an assessment. 5. The ld CIT{A) is not justified on facts and in law in deleting the addition ignoring the decision in the case of EN Gopa Kumar Vs CIT(2016) wherein

ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 539/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs. Ascend Telecom Income Tax, Central Circle Infrastructure (P) Ltd 3(2), Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.539/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ascend Telecom Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Infrastructure (P) Ltd Income Tax, Central Secunderabad Circle 3(2), Hyderabad Pan:Aaefa2381H (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.R. Vasudevan राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Are Cross Appeals Filed By Both The Assessee As Well As The Revenue For The A.Y 2010-11 Against The Common Order Dated 31/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A) 11 Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri K.R. VasudevanFor Respondent: : Smt. T Vijayalakshmi, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

section 153A/ 153C of the IT Act the AO can take into consideration material other than what was available during search and seizure operation for making an assessment. 5. The ld CIT{A) is not justified on facts and in law in deleting the addition ignoring the decision in the case of EN Gopa Kumar Vs CIT(2016) wherein

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. INDRANI PRASAD , NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 467/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

271 (l)(G), 271A and 2718. Section 158 BFA provides [or levy of interest and penalty in cases of search on .or after January 1, 1997. Section 158 BO specifies the authorities competent to make the block assessment. Section 158 BH provides for application of all the other provisions of this Act, except those as provided in Chapter

INDRANI PRASAD ,NEW DELHI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 409/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

271 (l)(G), 271A and 2718. Section 158 BFA provides [or levy of interest and penalty in cases of search on .or after January 1, 1997. Section 158 BO specifies the authorities competent to make the block assessment. Section 158 BH provides for application of all the other provisions of this Act, except those as provided in Chapter