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.

56 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 149(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi408Mumbai376Kolkata198Jaipur143Karnataka101Ahmedabad89Chennai67Hyderabad58Indore56Pune56Bangalore54Raipur43Calcutta34Rajkot34Chandigarh29Lucknow23Amritsar22Guwahati22Visakhapatnam21Allahabad20Cuttack17Surat14Nagpur14Dehradun12Ranchi12Agra10Cochin8Jodhpur4Patna2Rajasthan1SC1Telangana1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)109Addition to Income52Section 27430Penalty26Section 143(3)25Section 271A24Section 26319Section 153A17Section 147

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

u/s. 274 of the Act should be specifically state the grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c}, i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. 8.4. The Hori'ble Supreme Court in Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT [2007J 291 ITR 519 (SC), has observed that while sending the notice under section

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

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3

11
Disallowance11
Section 14810
Search & Seizure10

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

u/s. 274 of the Act should be specifically state the grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c}, i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. 8.4. The Hori'ble Supreme Court in Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT [2007J 291 ITR 519 (SC), has observed that while sending the notice under section

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

u/s. 274 of the Act should be specifically state the grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c}, i.e. whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. 8.4. The Hori'ble Supreme Court in Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT [2007J 291 ITR 519 (SC), has observed that while sending the notice under section

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

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma. When the quantum issue came up before the Tribunal, protective addition in the hands of the assessee was confirmed as substantive addition. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1

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

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma. When the quantum issue came up before the Tribunal, protective addition in the hands of the assessee was confirmed as substantive addition. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1

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

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma. When the quantum issue came up before the Tribunal, protective addition in the hands of the assessee was confirmed as substantive addition. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1

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

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma. When the quantum issue came up before the Tribunal, protective addition in the hands of the assessee was confirmed as substantive addition. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1

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

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma. When the quantum issue came up before the Tribunal, protective addition in the hands of the assessee was confirmed as substantive addition. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1

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

section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2009 whereas substantive additions were made in the hands of the assessee’s father, Dr. Yogiraj Sharma. When the quantum issue came up before the Tribunal, protective addition in the hands of the assessee was confirmed as substantive addition. Subsequently, penalty proceedings were initiated u/s 271(1

LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA L/H SHRI PREM CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

ITA 441/IND/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Nov 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

271 (SC) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait Vs. CIT (1959) 371TR 151 (SC) Nai Dunia News &Network Pvt Ltd. 171TJ 289 Trib.lndore AO made adhoc disallowance for expenses holding that "some" vouchers were not verifiable. HELD, no specific defect is pointed out. 'A' has maintained proper books which has not been rejected. B. ACIT vs.Popular Art Palace

THE DCIT, 1(1), BHOPAL vs. SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

ITA 405/IND/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Nov 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

271 (SC) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait Vs. CIT (1959) 371TR 151 (SC) Nai Dunia News &Network Pvt Ltd. 171TJ 289 Trib.lndore AO made adhoc disallowance for expenses holding that "some" vouchers were not verifiable. HELD, no specific defect is pointed out. 'A' has maintained proper books which has not been rejected. B. ACIT vs.Popular Art Palace

SMT. SARITA CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee for Assessment Years

ITA 442/IND/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Nov 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradit(Ss)A Nos. 158 To 163/Ind/2015 Assessment Years 2000-01 To 2005-06 & Assessment Year-2006-07

Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(c)

271 (SC) Omar Salay Mohamed Sait Vs. CIT (1959) 371TR 151 (SC) Nai Dunia News &Network Pvt Ltd. 171TJ 289 Trib.lndore AO made adhoc disallowance for expenses holding that "some" vouchers were not verifiable. HELD, no specific defect is pointed out. 'A' has maintained proper books which has not been rejected. B. ACIT vs.Popular Art Palace

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)

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

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,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

DR. VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT CIR. 2(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

u/s 263 of the Act do not stand for as a basis for invoking provisions u/s 263 of the Act. ITA Nos.350 & 66/Ind/2017 & ITANo.57/Ind/2019 Vinod Bhandari 41. In the instant case, the Learned Assessing officer has raised number of queries regarding the issues now sought to be revised by the CIT which were replied by the assessee through detailed submissions

SHRI VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE PR.CIT-1, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 350/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

u/s 263 of the Act do not stand for as a basis for invoking provisions u/s 263 of the Act. ITA Nos.350 & 66/Ind/2017 & ITANo.57/Ind/2019 Vinod Bhandari 41. In the instant case, the Learned Assessing officer has raised number of queries regarding the issues now sought to be revised by the CIT which were replied by the assessee through detailed submissions

DR. VINOD BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CIR. 2(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 57/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Vinod Bhandari, Pr. Cit(1), Indore 21- Gf, Bhandari House, Talkies, Scheme No.54, Vs. Vijay Nagar, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) Pan No.Abnpb6240M Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

u/s 263 of the Act do not stand for as a basis for invoking provisions u/s 263 of the Act. ITA Nos.350 & 66/Ind/2017 & ITANo.57/Ind/2019 Vinod Bhandari 41. In the instant case, the Learned Assessing officer has raised number of queries regarding the issues now sought to be revised by the CIT which were replied by the assessee through detailed submissions

SHRI UMESH LILANI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT (CENTRAL) I, INDORE

In the result, all the seven appeals filed by different Assessees are allowed

ITA 170/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad1. Ita No. 172/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14 2. Ita No. 169/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14 3.Ita No. 170/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14 4.Ita No. 9/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14 5.Ita No. 10/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14 6.Ita No. 11/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14 7. Ita No. 12/Ind/2017 Assessment Year 2013-14

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

section 271AAB/ 271(1)(c) of the Act. We, therefore, like to adjudicate the legal issue first. 10. We find it necessary to peruse the notice issued u/s 274 of the Act. It is not disputed at the end of both the parties that similar type of notice has been issued in all these cases. We, therefore, reproduced below