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.

77 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 227clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi315Mumbai192Karnataka131Jaipur89Indore77Ahmedabad49Chandigarh37Bangalore31Pune22Allahabad20Kolkata17Raipur14Chennai14Lucknow13Visakhapatnam11Amritsar10Hyderabad9Dehradun7Guwahati6Surat6Rajkot3Agra2Rajasthan1Cochin1Panaji1Telangana1Varanasi1Cuttack1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(b)138Section 142(1)92Section 13257Penalty51Section 69A49Section 14446Section 271A44Section 115B30Addition to Income

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

271 are mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law; The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, the principles of natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee; taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb

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

Showing 1–20 of 77 · Page 1 of 4

27
Business Income12
Section 132(4)8
Unexplained Money7

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

271 are mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law; The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, the principles of natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee; taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb

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

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

271 are mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law; The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, the principles of natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee; taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb

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

271 are mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law; The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, the principles of natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee; taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb

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 348/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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

VAISHALI SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

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

ITA 379/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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

VAISHALI SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

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

ITA 377/IND/2018[12-13]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

SUNIT MADHOK,INDORE vs. DCIT,CENTRAL-1, , BHOPAL

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

ITA 344/IND/2018[16-17]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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 346/IND/2018[11-12]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

SUNIT MADHOK,INDORE vs. DCIT,CENTRAL-1, , BHOPAL

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

ITA 343/IND/2018[15-16]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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

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

ITA 353/IND/2018[11-12]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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

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

ITA 354/IND/2018[12-13]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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

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

ITA 356/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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

VAISHALI SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

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

ITA 375/IND/2018[10-11]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

VAISHALI SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

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

ITA 376/IND/2018[11-12]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

SUNIT MADHOK,INDORE vs. DCIT,CENTRAL-1, , BHOPAL

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

ITA 339/IND/2018[11-12]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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause

VAISHALI SHIVHARE,GWALIOR vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, BHOPAL

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

ITA 378/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 271(1)(b) of the Act. 7. Ld. counsel for all these assessees commonly submitted that all the assessee(s) were prevented for reasonable cause for non- appearance because copies of seized documents was given very late and the time given to furnish the reply was very short for making due compliance and thus it was a reasonable cause