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.

8 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 259clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi109Mumbai87Chennai72Jaipur37Bangalore22Chandigarh22Lucknow10Panaji10Ahmedabad9Patna8Indore8Kolkata6Hyderabad6Guwahati5Pune4Allahabad3Jodhpur2Nagpur2Raipur2Cochin2Cuttack2Visakhapatnam1Amritsar1Rajkot1Surat1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)22Addition to Income8Section 143(3)6Section 686Penalty6Section 56(2)(viib)5Section 133A2Unexplained Investment2Reassessment

SWAN PETRCHEMICALS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. NFAC DELHI, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 496/IND/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jul 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Swan Petrochemicals Dcit (Central), Pvt.Ltd, Indore Unit No.308 Acme Plaza, Opp. Sangam Cinema, Vs. Andheri Kurlka, Maharashtra (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabcr9592C Assessee By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan & Ms. Ruchira Singhal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 43(5)

Section 271(1)(c) whereas at the most it is a case of furnishing incorrect particulars of income and not concealment of particulars of income. Therefore the Explanation-1 is not applicable in the case of the assessee. In support of his contention he has relied upon the following decisions: 4 M/s. Swan Petrochemicals Pvt.Ltd (i) Hon’ble Supreme Court

ITO-1, ITARSI vs. SHRI ANIL KUMAR SONI, ITARSI

2

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITANo

ITA 334/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Years: 2011-12 Ito-1

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income. 9. We find that it is a judiciary settled proposition that where the income declared during the course of survey is offered to tax in the return of income filed within the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act and the assessing officer accepts the income declared

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), BHOPAL vs. MADHYA PRADESH POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, BHOPAL

In the result, these appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 401/IND/2025[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Nov 2025
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

259 & 260/Ind/2015 for\nΑ.Υ. 2010-11 and 11-12; 449/Ind/2016 for A.Υ. 2012-13 and\n125/Ind/2017 for A.Υ. 2013-14 dated 11.10.2018 directed the AO to\ndelete the addition. Since the quantum addition has been deleted by\nthe Hon. ITAT in their order dated 11.10.2018, the penalty levied\non the basis of quantum addition also ceases

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), BHOPAL vs. MADHYA PRADESH POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, BHOPAL

In the result, these appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 400/IND/2025[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

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

259 & 260/Ind/2015 for A.Y. 2010-11 and 11-12; 449/Ind/2016 for A.Y. 2012-13 and 125/Ind/2017 for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 11.10.2018 directed the AO to delete the addition. Since the quantum addition has been deleted by the Hon. ITAT in their order dated 11.10.2018, the penalty levied on the basis of quantum addition also ceases to exist. Therefore

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), BHOPAL vs. MADHYA PRADESH POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED, BHOPAL

In the result, these appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 402/IND/2025[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

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

259 & 260/Ind/2015 for A.Y. 2010-11 and 11-12; 449/Ind/2016 for A.Y. 2012-13 and 125/Ind/2017 for A.Y. 2013-14 dated 11.10.2018 directed the AO to delete the addition. Since the quantum addition has been deleted by the Hon. ITAT in their order dated 11.10.2018, the penalty levied on the basis of quantum addition also ceases to exist. Therefore

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

259 ITR 19. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the ground nos. 2(a) & 2(c) raised by the appellant for both the assessment years and the same are hereby Dismissed. 21 M/s. Shivalika Realities Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.95 & 94/Ind/2018 . 19. Now, coming to the ground no. 2(b) raised by the appellant. We find that undisputedly, during

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

259 ITR 19. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in the ground nos. 2(a) & 2(c) raised by the appellant for both the assessment years and the same are hereby Dismissed. 21 M/s. Shivalika Realities Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.95 & 94/Ind/2018 . 19. Now, coming to the ground no. 2(b) raised by the appellant. We find that undisputedly, during

M/S OREF SECURITIES PRIVATE LTD. ,MANDSAUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 70/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms.Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.70/Ind/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-14 Vs. Ito, Mandsaur. M/S.Oref Securities P.Ltd. 69, Agrasen Nagar B/H. Mid India Mandsaur.

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Solanki, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)9c) are also initiated.” 3. Before the ld.CIT(A), the appellant filed following written submissions: With regard to the Income Tax Appeal in the case of our above named client company for the Assessment Year 2013-14, we have to submit as under:- Ground No. 1 1.1 This ground relate to deemed addition