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.

122 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 2(22)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai697Delhi623Jaipur187Ahmedabad162Bangalore153Chennai151Hyderabad133Indore122Raipur122Kolkata91Pune69Chandigarh62Rajkot60Surat57Allahabad34Visakhapatnam27Lucknow27Nagpur26Amritsar22Agra15Ranchi14Patna13Cochin11Dehradun8Cuttack8Guwahati7Varanasi6Panaji6Jodhpur5Jabalpur2

Key Topics

Section 271D192Section 269S82Addition to Income64Penalty62Section 271(1)(c)57Section 271A56Section 143(3)54Section 26346Section 153A

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

Appeal is allowed

ITA 808/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 271ASection 274

22. Section 271AAB provides the procedure for penalty where the search\nhas been initiated. In the present case, admittedly a search and seizure\noperation is carried out in which the assessees have surrendered the\namount of Rs.4 crores each (Rs.4 lakh each by all the three assessees) and\ntherefore, in view of the provisions of Section 271AAB the assessees

MUKESH KUMAR RANKA,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Showing 1–20 of 122 · Page 1 of 7

36
Section 335
Disallowance27
Depreciation12

Appeals are allowed

ITA 97/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Indore21 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

E. Even the quantum of penalty leviable u/s 271AAB is also subject to the condition prescribed under clauses (a) to (c) of sub-section (1) and the AO has to again give a finding for levy of penalty @ 10% or 20% or 30% of the undisclosed income. Thus the AO is bound to take a decision as to what default

MUKESH KUMAR RANKA,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

ITA 98/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore21 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

E. Even the quantum of penalty leviable u/s 271AAB is also subject to the condition prescribed under clauses (a) to (c) of sub-section (1) and the AO has to again give a finding for levy of penalty @ 10% or 20% or 30% of the undisclosed income. Thus the AO is bound to take a decision as to what default

ANJU JAIN, LR SHRI SUSHIL JAIN ,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

ITA 104/IND/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Indore21 Mar 2024

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

E. Even the quantum of penalty leviable u/s 271AAB is also subject to the condition prescribed under clauses (a) to (c) of sub-section (1) and the AO has to again give a finding for levy of penalty @ 10% or 20% or 30% of the undisclosed income. Thus the AO is bound to take a decision as to what default

ANJU JAIN, LR SUSHIL JAIN,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UJJAIN, UJJAIN, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeals are allowed

ITA 103/IND/2024[AY 2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore21 Mar 2024

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

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

E. Even the quantum of penalty leviable u/s 271AAB is also subject to the condition prescribed under clauses (a) to (c) of sub-section (1) and the AO has to again give a finding for levy of penalty @ 10% or 20% or 30% of the undisclosed income. Thus the AO is bound to take a decision as to what default

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

ITA 684/IND/2024[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Apr 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

Section 153ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated 28.06.2024 of CIT(A) u/s

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

ITA 682/IND/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Apr 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

Section 153ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated 28.06.2024 of CIT(A) u/s

PREM CHAWLA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. SUDESH CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

ITA 681/IND/2024[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Apr 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

Section 153ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated 28.06.2024 of CIT(A) u/s

PREM CHAWLA,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeals of the assessee are allowed mutatis mutandis

ITA 678/IND/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Apr 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshimember

Section 153ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee before this Tribunal in terms of Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for sake of brevity). The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number CIT(A)-3 Bhopal/IT/10289/2016-17/139 dated 28.06.2024 of CIT(A) u/s

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

ITA 188/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshishri Vimal Todi, Additional Commissioner बनाम/ 501, Darshan Residency, Of Income-Tax, Vs. 104-105, Anand Bazar, Indore Indore

Section 132Section 254(2)Section 271DSection 275Section 275(1)(c)

E R Per B.M. Biyani, AM: Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 29.12.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arise out of penalty-order dated 28.03.2019 passed by Addl. CIT (Central), Indore u/s 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for assessment-year

PRAKASH ASPHALTINGS AND TOLL HIGHWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED,MHOW vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, INDORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 720/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15 Prakash Asphalting & Toll Acit Central Circle -1 Highways (India) Limited, Indore बनाम/ 76, Mall Road, Vs. Mhow (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aabcp0398N Assessee By Shri Anup Garg & Vikas Guru, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2025

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 271ASection 274Section 80

E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by order of first appeal dated 30.08.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax-3, Bhopal [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 21.03.2022 passed by learned ACIT, Central Circle, Indore [“AO”] u/s 271AAB(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for assessment-year

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)

271(1)(c). The AO has imposed penalty qua the addition made in assessment-order on account of dividend u/s 2(22)(e). The AO observed that the assessee was holding 49.20% shares in M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. had made advances of Rs. 35,00,000/- to assessee

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)

271(1)(c). The AO has imposed penalty qua the addition made in assessment-order on account of dividend u/s 2(22)(e). The AO observed that the assessee was holding 49.20% shares in M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. had made advances of Rs. 35,00,000/- to assessee

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)

271(1)(c). The AO has imposed penalty qua the addition made in assessment-order on account of dividend u/s 2(22)(e). The AO observed that the assessee was holding 49.20% shares in M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. had made advances of Rs. 35,00,000/- to assessee

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)

271(1)(c). The AO has imposed penalty qua the addition made in assessment-order on account of dividend u/s 2(22)(e). The AO observed that the assessee was holding 49.20% shares in M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. He further observed that M/s Choudhary Innovative Business Pvt. Ltd. had made advances of Rs. 35,00,000/- to assessee

DCIT(CENTRAL)-2, INDORE, INDORE vs. M/S KALYAN TOLL HIGHWAY PVT.LTD, INDORE

ITA 85/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2013-14 Dcit(Central)-2 M/S. Kalyan Toll Highway Pvt. Ltd. Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No. Aadck9401F Appellant By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr Respondent By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan, Ca Date Of Hearing: 21.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M:

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

E R PER MANISH BORAD, A.M: The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of the Revenue for Assessment Year 2013-14 is directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) (in short ‘Ld. CIT], Bhopal dated 07.11.2019 which are arising out of the penalty order passed M/s. Kalyan toll Highways Pvt. Ltd. ITANo.85/Ind/2020 u/s 271

SRK DEV BUILD PVT LTD.,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT 5(1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

ITA 471/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2016-17 Srk Dev Build Pvt. Ltd, Dcit/Acit-5(1) 18/2, Lasudia Mori, Indore बनाम/ A.B. Road, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaqcs3387P Assessee By Shri Pranay Goyal & S.N. Goyal, Cas Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.06.2024

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40

E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 02.11.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 28.06.2019 passed by learned DCIT/ACIT-5(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for assessment-year [“AY”] 2016-17, the assessee

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 189/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

E are initiated is inconsequential. On the other hand, if the assessment order is taken as the initiation of penalty proceedings, such initiation is by an authority who is incompetent and the proceedings thereafter would be proceedings without jurisdiction. If that be so, the initiation of the penalty proceedings is only with the issuance of the notice issued

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 190/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

E are initiated is inconsequential. On the other hand, if the assessment order is taken as the initiation of penalty proceedings, such initiation is by an authority who is incompetent and the proceedings thereafter would be proceedings without jurisdiction. If that be so, the initiation of the penalty proceedings is only with the issuance of the notice issued

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1), BHOPOAL, BHOPAL vs. M/S RASHTRIYA TAKNIKI SHIKSHAK PRASHIKSHAN EVAM ANUNSANDHAN SANSTHAN, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 509/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniacit Circle-1(1) M/S. Rashtriya Takniki Bhopal Shikshak Prashikshan Evam Anunsandhan Sansthan बनाम/ Samiti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aabar2266H Assessee By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Shri Vinod Joshi, Ar Date Of Hearing 08.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.12.2025

Section 10Section 271(1)(c)Section 43(1)

E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by order of first appeal dated 19.02.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 28.02.2020 passed by learned DCIT/ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 271(1)(c) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for assessment-year