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.

289 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 142clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,317Mumbai1,035Jaipur333Ahmedabad310Indore289Kolkata237Surat229Pune205Hyderabad199Bangalore166Chennai155Chandigarh129Rajkot118Karnataka105Lucknow93Visakhapatnam82Raipur66Amritsar57Allahabad54Cochin41Cuttack39Calcutta36Nagpur36Guwahati35Agra33Patna29Jabalpur29Jodhpur24Panaji17Dehradun15Ranchi12SC6Varanasi4Rajasthan2Telangana2

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(b)190Section 142(1)133Penalty89Section 14483Section 143(3)57Section 271(1)(c)53Section 13250Section 153A45Addition to Income

M/S KETI SANGAM INFRASTRUCTURE (I) LTD.,INDORE vs. THE DCIT (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

ITA 1341/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalties were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The common legal ground taken by all these assessees is with regard to challenging the Keti Sangam, etc. ITA Nos. 516/2017, 603/Ind/2016 etc. legality and validity of the notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is admitted by both the parties that similar notices have been issued

M/S SHREE COAL ENTERPRISES (I) PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 3(1), BHOPAL

Showing 1–20 of 289 · Page 1 of 15

...
31
Section 271C29
Deduction11
Disallowance9

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

ITA 1337/IND/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalties were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The common legal ground taken by all these assessees is with regard to challenging the Keti Sangam, etc. ITA Nos. 516/2017, 603/Ind/2016 etc. legality and validity of the notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is admitted by both the parties that similar notices have been issued

M/S KETI SANGHAM INFRASTRUTURE (I) LIMITED,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), INDORE

In the result, all the 12 appeals filed at the instance of

ITA 516/IND/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

penalties were initiated u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The common legal ground taken by all these assessees is with regard to challenging the Keti Sangam, etc. ITA Nos. 516/2017, 603/Ind/2016 etc. legality and validity of the notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It is admitted by both the parties that similar notices have been issued

GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE

Accordingly, Ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is allowed

ITA 808/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 115BSection 131Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 271ASection 274

271(1)(c) whereas the notice has been issued u/s 271AAB. In nutshell, Ld. AR argued that the AO has specified a wrong charge in the notice issued to assessee and thereby committed a grave illegality in initiating penalty-proceeding. Therefore, Ld. AR contended, the penalty proceeding initiated by AO is liable to be stuck down. To support his contention

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS AND FABRICS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ADDL. CIT- RANGE-5, INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 484/IND/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PVT.LTD.,INDORE vs. THE JCIT, R-5 (PRESENT AO: DCIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 961/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 752/IND/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS AND FABRICS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 5(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 404/IND/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT-2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 293/IND/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 753/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

M/S INDUSTRIAL FILTERS & FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 2(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee

ITA 754/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2007-08

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

u/s 68. The assessment and additions therein was completely based on the findings of the fact. The para 5.3 of the Ld CIT(A) order while confirming the penalty reads as under: 18." The above observations strengthen the case for levy of penalty as it has been brought in the assessment order as well as the penalty order that

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

ITA 138/IND/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is ilegal and bad in law and consequently levy of penalty for the same is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. To adjudicate this issue, we reproduce below two relevant portions of the show cause notice for the assessment year 2002-03 issued by ACIT 1(1), Bhopal, vide letter dated

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

ITA 137/IND/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is ilegal and bad in law and consequently levy of penalty for the same is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. To adjudicate this issue, we reproduce below two relevant portions of the show cause notice for the assessment year 2002-03 issued by ACIT 1(1), Bhopal, vide letter dated

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

ITA 141/IND/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is ilegal and bad in law and consequently levy of penalty for the same is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. To adjudicate this issue, we reproduce below two relevant portions of the show cause notice for the assessment year 2002-03 issued by ACIT 1(1), Bhopal, vide letter dated

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

ITA 140/IND/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is ilegal and bad in law and consequently levy of penalty for the same is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. To adjudicate this issue, we reproduce below two relevant portions of the show cause notice for the assessment year 2002-03 issued by ACIT 1(1), Bhopal, vide letter dated

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

ITA 136/IND/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is ilegal and bad in law and consequently levy of penalty for the same is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. To adjudicate this issue, we reproduce below two relevant portions of the show cause notice for the assessment year 2002-03 issued by ACIT 1(1), Bhopal, vide letter dated

SHRI GAURAV SHARMA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(1), BHOPAL

In the result, all the six appeals of the assessee

ITA 139/IND/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act is ilegal and bad in law and consequently levy of penalty for the same is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. To adjudicate this issue, we reproduce below two relevant portions of the show cause notice for the assessment year 2002-03 issued by ACIT 1(1), Bhopal, vide letter dated

PATEL EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY,INDORE vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)- !, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

ITA 355/IND/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2019

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

u/s 142(1) of the Act which prompted the assessing officer to invoke the provisions of section 271(1)(b) of the Act and subsequently levied of penalty

M/S REGENT BEERS AND WINES LTD. ,INDORE vs. DCIT,CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

ITA 349/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2019

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

u/s 142(1) of the Act which prompted the assessing officer to invoke the provisions of section 271(1)(b) of the Act and subsequently levied of penalty

SH. RAMSWAROOP SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. D.C.I.T., CENTRAL- 1, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of the assessee(s) in ITANo

ITA 389/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Borad

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)

u/s 142(1) of the Act which prompted the assessing officer to invoke the provisions of section 271(1)(b) of the Act and subsequently levied of penalty