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.

2 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 244Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi113Mumbai87Bangalore24Karnataka21Allahabad16Ahmedabad15Kolkata10Chandigarh7Jaipur5Chennai4Lucknow3Cochin3Pune2Indore2Rajkot1Dehradun1Hyderabad1

Key Topics

Section 2638Section 143(3)6Section 1484Section 143(2)4Section 244A2TDS2Addition to Income2

SHYAM PRATAP SINGH SHEKHAWAT,LUDHIANA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 304/IND/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11 Shri Shyam Pratap Singh Shekhawat Vs Pr. Cit, Zonal Office, Bhai Bala Chowk, Bhopal 5Th Floor, Noble Enclave, Ludhiana (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan Acaps0740F Revenue By Smt. Ashima Gupta, Cit Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Advocates Date Of Hearing 22.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2019 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 244ASection 263Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

244A on income tax refund for A.Y.2008-09 though the assessee has not received any interest on such refund as the same was not reflecting in Form 26AS. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, to urge, to alter or to amend any of the ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 4. At the outset

M/S. M. LODHA IMPEX,RATLAM vs. THE ITO-1, RATLAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 185/IND/2016[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jun 2018AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradआ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 185/Ind/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2000-01 M/S.M.Lodha Impex, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, 117-118, Manak Chowk, Ward 1, Ratlam. Ratlam.

For Appellant: Shri Satiksh Solanki, DRFor Respondent: 29.05.2018
Section 119(1)(b)Section 119(2)(b)Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234A

244A would be admissible on belated refund claims and that the instructions cannot run counter to the legislative provisions and create rights and obligation which are contrary to statute. Instructions should supplant the law and not supplement the law. " As per Para 7 of Instruction no. 13/2006, dated 22-12- 2006 of board, "the CCsIT/CsIT are empowered to direct