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.

15 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 149clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai215Delhi171Jaipur77Chennai58Hyderabad49Ahmedabad44Raipur43Bangalore39Rajkot34Pune30Chandigarh24Kolkata22Allahabad20Amritsar16Indore15Lucknow14Nagpur13Visakhapatnam9Guwahati9Surat9Agra9Cuttack6Dehradun3Cochin2Patna2Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)18Section 26316Addition to Income15Section 40A(3)9Section 699Section 1478Section 153A8Penalty6Section 1485

VIJAY CHOUDHARY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 1(2), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 482/IND/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 271(1)(c)

149/-. The assessee was, however, not satisfied and carried matter to ITAT, Indore whereupon the ITAT, in a consolidated order in IT(SS)A No. 89 & 90/Ind/2011 for AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 dated 22.04.2013, passed following order: Page 3 of 10 Shri Vijay Choudhary, Mumbai ITA Nos. 482 to 485/Ind/2023 A.Ys

VIJAY CHOUDHARY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 1(2), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 484/IND/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 271(1)(c)
Unexplained Investment5
Section 143(3)4
Reassessment3

149/-. The assessee was, however, not satisfied and carried matter to ITAT, Indore whereupon the ITAT, in a consolidated order in IT(SS)A No. 89 & 90/Ind/2011 for AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 dated 22.04.2013, passed following order: Page 3 of 10 Shri Vijay Choudhary, Mumbai ITA Nos. 482 to 485/Ind/2023 A.Ys

VIJAY CHOUDHARY,ANDHERI MUMBAI vs. ACIT 1(2), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 483/IND/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 271(1)(c)

149/-. The assessee was, however, not satisfied and carried matter to ITAT, Indore whereupon the ITAT, in a consolidated order in IT(SS)A No. 89 & 90/Ind/2011 for AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 dated 22.04.2013, passed following order: Page 3 of 10 Shri Vijay Choudhary, Mumbai ITA Nos. 482 to 485/Ind/2023 A.Ys

VIJAY CHOUDHARY,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 1(2), INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 485/IND/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 271(1)(c)

149/-. The assessee was, however, not satisfied and carried matter to ITAT, Indore whereupon the ITAT, in a consolidated order in IT(SS)A No. 89 & 90/Ind/2011 for AY 2003-04 and 2004-05 dated 22.04.2013, passed following order: Page 3 of 10 Shri Vijay Choudhary, Mumbai ITA Nos. 482 to 485/Ind/2023 A.Ys

DCIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL vs. SHAILENDRA SHARMA, BHOPAL

In the result the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment

ITA 305/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 153A

149, Section 151 and Section 153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132-A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall- (a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within such period

VINITA RAHEJA,INDORE vs. ITO-2(4), INDORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assesse arising the assessment order as well as penalty order are allowed

ITA 512/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 1Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) respectively for A.Y.2010-11. In the quantum appeal the assessee has raised following grounds: “1. The learned Income Tax Commissioner ITANo.512 & 513/Ind/2023 Vinita Raheja (A) had not considered all produced documents at appeal stage as (1) NSE profit and loss a/c (2)financial transition statement (3) NSE profit and loss future & option

VINITA RAHEJA,INDORE vs. ITO-2(4), INDORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assesse arising the assessment order as well as penalty order are allowed

ITA 513/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 1Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

penalty order passed u/s 271(1)(c) respectively for A.Y.2010-11. In the quantum appeal the assessee has raised following grounds: “1. The learned Income Tax Commissioner ITANo.512 & 513/Ind/2023 Vinita Raheja (A) had not considered all produced documents at appeal stage as (1) NSE profit and loss a/c (2)financial transition statement (3) NSE profit and loss future & option

DCIT- (CENTRAL)-3, INDORE vs. MRS. JATINDER KAUR BHATIA, KHANDWA

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s

ITA 206/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 69

271(1)(c) are hereby initiated in the matter for A.Y. 2015-16 & A.Y. 2016-17. I am also satisfied that the assessee has under-reported his income for A.Y. 2017-18. Therefore, penalty proceedings u/s 270A are hereby initiated in the matter for A.Y. 2017- 18. Further, in view of the provisions of section 271AAB

DCIT- (CENTRAL)-3, INDORE vs. MRS. JATINDER KAUR BHATIA, KHANDWA

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s

ITA 207/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 69

271(1)(c) are hereby initiated in the matter for A.Y. 2015-16 & A.Y. 2016-17. I am also satisfied that the assessee has under-reported his income for A.Y. 2017-18. Therefore, penalty proceedings u/s 270A are hereby initiated in the matter for A.Y. 2017- 18. Further, in view of the provisions of section 271AAB

MRS. JATINDER KAUR BHATIA,KHANDWA vs. ACIT- (CENTRAL) UJJAIN, UJJAIN

Appeals are dismissed and assessee’s

ITA 227/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 69

271(1)(c) are hereby initiated in the matter for A.Y. 2015-16 & A.Y. 2016-17. I am also satisfied that the assessee has under-reported his income for A.Y. 2017-18. Therefore, penalty proceedings u/s 270A are hereby initiated in the matter for A.Y. 2017- 18. Further, in view of the provisions of section 271AAB

M/S SHIVALIKA REALITIES P LTD,INDORE vs. ITO 5(1) , INDORE

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

ITA 95/IND/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Oct 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

149 of the Act. We also find that after issuing the notices, upon request of the appellant, the copies of the reasons recorded were provided to the appellant and the objections raised by the appellant subsequently against such reasons were also disposed off by the AO by passing speaking orders. Thus, in our considered view, the assessing officer has duly

M/S SHIVALIKA REALITIES P LTD,INDORE vs. ITO 5(1) , INDORE

In the result of appeals of the assessee for AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 vide ITA no

ITA 94/IND/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2008-09 & Assessment Year: 2009-10

149 of the Act. We also find that after issuing the notices, upon request of the appellant, the copies of the reasons recorded were provided to the appellant and the objections raised by the appellant subsequently against such reasons were also disposed off by the AO by passing speaking orders. Thus, in our considered view, the assessing officer has duly

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 776/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

penalty proceedings uls 271(1)(c) of the I..T. Act are initiated separately. 11. Per contra ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the following written submissions:- Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 The facts of the case are that the appellant is a society which was established on 04.12.1996 basically for development of downtrodden/poor people of society

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 232/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

penalty proceedings uls 271(1)(c) of the I..T. Act are initiated separately. 11. Per contra ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the following written submissions:- Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 The facts of the case are that the appellant is a society which was established on 04.12.1996 basically for development of downtrodden/poor people of society

AGROH INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS P LTD,MHOW vs. PR CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 95/IND/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S Agroh Infrastructure Pr. Cit (Central) Developers Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal Aqua Point, A.B.Road, Vs. Umaria, Mhow, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaeca 2752 L Assessee By Shri Manish Mittal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2023

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

149 ITR 19. 5. We have considered the rival submission as well as relevant material on record. The assessee has challenged the second revision order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT dated 24.02.2017 whereby the order passed by the Ld. AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 31st July 2017 was held as erroneous so far as the prejudicial