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.

30 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 260clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai292Delhi261Karnataka117Jaipur50Ahmedabad44Chennai37Kolkata36Calcutta34Indore30Pune28Bangalore25Visakhapatnam15Chandigarh14Lucknow13Cuttack12Panaji12Hyderabad11Agra8Guwahati7Cochin7Surat7Rajkot4Amritsar4Allahabad2Raipur2SC2Telangana2Jodhpur1Patna1Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Section 153A58Section 271(1)(c)41Section 139(1)35Section 1028Section 271A27Addition to Income26Penalty22Section 143(3)10Section 132

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

260/-. In\nthe income so declared in return, the assessee included income of Rs.\n47,59,000/- out of the admitted undisclosed income of Rs.49,99,000/-. Finally,\nthe AO completed assessment u/s 143(3) whereby (i) he made a further\naddition of Rs.2,40,000/- being the difference of Rs.49,99,000/- surrendered\nbut only Rs.47,59,000/- declared

SHRI AKHILESH KUMAR GUPTA ,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1 (2), BHOPAL

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 115B7
Exemption7
Undisclosed Income4

In the result appeal of the assessee pertaining to Assessment

ITA 496/IND/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Years 2007-08 Shri Akhilesh Kumar Ito-1(2), Gupta, Bhopal Plot No.162, Shop G, Ashirvad Complex, Zone-!, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aenpg0415N Revenue By Shri K.C. Selvamani, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ca Date Of Hearing 07.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2019 O R D E R

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

260/- and is liable for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,1961". 7. He further submitted that even at the time of imposition of Akhilesh Kumar Gupta penalty, the AO was not sure as to on which limb penalty is to be imposed. On this count only the penalty order is liable to be quashed

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)

Section assessee Year order of order of under CIT(A)_1 ACIT-1(2) which passed Late Smt. 2000-01 to 30.03.2015 19.03.2013 153C Sudesh 2005-06 r.w.s. Chawla and 143(3) 2006-07 143(3) Prem Chawla 2000-01 to 30.03.2015 19.03.2013 153C 2005-06 r.w.s. and 143(3) 2006-07 143(3) Smt. Sarita

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)

Section assessee Year order of order of under CIT(A)_1 ACIT-1(2) which passed Late Smt. 2000-01 to 30.03.2015 19.03.2013 153C Sudesh 2005-06 r.w.s. Chawla and 143(3) 2006-07 143(3) Prem Chawla 2000-01 to 30.03.2015 19.03.2013 153C 2005-06 r.w.s. and 143(3) 2006-07 143(3) Smt. Sarita

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)

Section assessee Year order of order of under CIT(A)_1 ACIT-1(2) which passed Late Smt. 2000-01 to 30.03.2015 19.03.2013 153C Sudesh 2005-06 r.w.s. Chawla and 143(3) 2006-07 143(3) Prem Chawla 2000-01 to 30.03.2015 19.03.2013 153C 2005-06 r.w.s. and 143(3) 2006-07 143(3) Smt. Sarita

THE ACIT-4(1), BHOPAL vs. M/S. R. K. GUPTA CONSTRACTORS & ENGINEERS PVT. LTD., BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 598/IND/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

SHRI SURENDRA SINGH BHATIA,INDORE vs. THE JCIT-3, INDORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 252/IND/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Nema, Sr. Advocate with Shri Gagan TiwariFor Respondent: 28.09.2022
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 271ASection 271DSection 274Section 41(1)

271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1), (4) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. Explanation. —For the purposes of this section, — (a) "undisclosed income" means— (i) any income

M/S PLATINUM HORAZINE PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT CIRCLE 3(1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands

ITA 713/IND/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./ I.T.A. No.713/Ind/2016 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10

Section 249Section 253Section 271(1)Section 4Section 5

u/s. 274 (1). Hence, the order be cancelled. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, it be held that neither the assessee has concealed the particulars of its income nor furnished inaccurate particulars of such income and therefore, the levy of penalty is unjustified and unlawful and , therefore, be cancelled. 6. That

ACIT-2(1), UJJAIN, UJJAIN vs. M/S RUCHI J OIL PVT. LTD,, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal ITANo

ITA 82/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Indore17 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 271ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 91D(1)Section 92BSection 92D(1)

260/-. Case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS followed by serving of statutory notices. During the course of assessment proceedings Ld. AO observed that the assessee has entered into a transaction of acquisition of an undertaking by way of slump sale from its sister concern M/s Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd. for a consideration

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 376/IND/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 382/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 381/IND/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 380/IND/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 378/IND/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 377/IND/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

M/S. M.P. RAJYA OPEN SCHOOL,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT 1(2), BHOPAL

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 379/IND/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore14 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri O.P. Meena, Am

Section 10Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

260-A of the Income Tax Act in the High Court. Substantial questions of law were framed and the appeals after admission were pending consideration before the Appellate forum. In the meanwhile, as proceedings for imposing penalty were initiated under the provisions of Section 271(1)(c) and ultimately when penalty were imposed by the Assessing Officer at the instance

JCIT OSD (CENTRAL)-1, RATLAM vs. SHRI KANTILAL KATARIA, RATLAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 220/IND/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri R.P. Maurya, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit Gaur
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 292B

u/s 271AAA with two charging A.Y. 2011-12 Page 2 of 4 limbs of section 271(1)(c) and consequently erred in applying ratio of decision of the Hon’ble High Court judgement in case of Kulwant Singh Bhatia in the instant case.” 3. The assessee is an individual and is deriving income from proprietary concern namely M/s. D.P. Industries

MR GAURAV AJMERA,RATLAM vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, INDORE

Accordingly. Thus, this ground is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 71/IND/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2017-18 Mr. Gaurav Ajmera, Dcit, बनाम/ 38, Ram Mohalla, Central Circle 2, Ratlam Indore. Vs. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aglpa8863C Assessee By Shri Pawan Ved, Advocate & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.09.2023

Section 115BSection 131Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 234ASection 271A

260/-. In the income so declared in return, the assessee included income of Rs. 47,59,000/- out of the admitted undisclosed income of Rs. 49,99,000/-. Finally, the AO completed assessment u/s 143(3) whereby (i) he made a further addition of Rs. 2,40,000/- being the difference of Rs. 49,99,000 surrendered but only

THE DCIT, (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, BHOPAL vs. M/S. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, BHOPAL

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 232/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

penalty proceedings uls 271(1)(c) of the I..T. Act are initiated separately. 11. Per contra ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the following written submissions:- Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 The facts of the case are that the appellant is a society which was established on 04.12.1996 basically for development of downtrodden/poor people of society

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. MAYANK WELFARE SOCIETY, INDORE

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for the AY 2013-14

ITA 776/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 115BSection 143(3)

penalty proceedings uls 271(1)(c) of the I..T. Act are initiated separately. 11. Per contra ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the following written submissions:- Mayank Welfare society ITANos.232 & 776/Ind/2018/17 The facts of the case are that the appellant is a society which was established on 04.12.1996 basically for development of downtrodden/poor people of society