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.

13 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 36(1)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai77Delhi20Pune17Indore13Jaipur9Nagpur9Kolkata4Rajkot2Bangalore2Chandigarh2Chennai1Amritsar1Ahmedabad1

Key Topics

Section 26331Section 271(1)(c)30Section 143(3)15Section 36(1)(viia)11Penalty7Disallowance7Section 56(2)(viib)6Section 36(1)(vii)6Addition to Income

THE ACIT-3(1), INDORE vs. M/S. NARMADA MALWA GRAMIN BANK, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 81/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2008-09 Acit- 3(1) M/S. Narmada Malwa Gramin Indore Bank, बनाम/ 201, Arcade Silver, 56 Shops, New Vs. Palasia, Indore (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaccn2847F Assessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

section 271(1)(c)." 5.12 Same view has been taken by the ITAT Indore wherein on similar facts regarding the claim of deduction ix] s 36(1)(viia) cancellation of penalty was upheld in the case of ACIT v / s Indore Premier Cooperative Bank in dated 06.10.2015. 5.13 In view of the above discussion the levy of penalty u/s

6
Capital Gains6
Long Term Capital Gains6
Deduction3

M/S. NARMADA MALWA GRAMIN BANK,INDORE vs. THE ACIT-3(1), INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/IND/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2008-09 Acit- 3(1) M/S. Narmada Malwa Gramin Indore Bank, बनाम/ 201, Arcade Silver, 56 Shops, New Vs. Palasia, Indore (M.P.) (Revenue ) (Respondent) P.A. No. Aaccn2847F Assessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

section 271(1)(c)." 5.12 Same view has been taken by the ITAT Indore wherein on similar facts regarding the claim of deduction ix] s 36(1)(viia) cancellation of penalty was upheld in the case of ACIT v / s Indore Premier Cooperative Bank in dated 06.10.2015. 5.13 In view of the above discussion the levy of penalty u/s

CIT-2, BHOPAL vs. KRASHAK SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT, RAISEN

In the result, both the appeals of revenue in case of Sewa

ITA 858/IND/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Raisen Bharkacha Vs. (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aafts5908N Assessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Krashak Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Maryadit, Bhaisaya Badi Vs. Raisen (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaak9049E

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(viia)

36(1)(viia) was not available to assessee (Being Primary agricultural credit society). Even the return for A.Y. 2008-09 and A.Y. 2009-10 were accepted. The assessee in a bonafide belief and relying on the audit report, could not add back the Provisions for bad & doubtful 5 Sewa & Krashak Sewa Sahakari Samiti Yaryadit ITANo.857/Ind/2018 & ITANo.858/Ind/2018 debt. Reliance is placed

CIT-2, BHOPAL vs. SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI, RAISEN

In the result, both the appeals of revenue in case of Sewa

ITA 857/IND/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Raisen Bharkacha Vs. (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aafts5908N Assessment Year: 2009-10 Cit,-2 Krashak Sewa Sahakari Samiti, बनाम/ Bhopal Maryadit, Bhaisaya Badi Vs. Raisen (Revenue) (Respondent) Pan:Aaaak9049E

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(viia)

36(1)(viia) was not available to assessee (Being Primary agricultural credit society). Even the return for A.Y. 2008-09 and A.Y. 2009-10 were accepted. The assessee in a bonafide belief and relying on the audit report, could not add back the Provisions for bad & doubtful 5 Sewa & Krashak Sewa Sahakari Samiti Yaryadit ITANo.857/Ind/2018 & ITANo.858/Ind/2018 debt. Reliance is placed

M/S JILA SAHKARI KRISHI AUR GRAMIN VIKAS BANK MYDT.,HOSHAGABAD vs. THE ACIT RANGE, ITARSI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 105/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(viia)

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for disallowance of provision of bad and doubtful debts and disallowance of provision for standard assets at Rs. 41,30,455/- and Rs. 1,85,865/-, respectively. Perusal of record shows that during penalty proceedings the assessee made no submissions and failed to appear before the Assessing Officer to plead its case

MADHYA PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDUT VITARAN COMPANY LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT- 2-(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 551/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(viia)

36(1)(viia) and not to assessee which is\nengaged in electricity distribution. Ultimately, the PCIT passed revision-\norder dated 23.03.2017 u/s 263 directing the AO to re-frame assessment\nafter examining the issue of deduction of “Provisions for bad and doubtful\ndebt\". Pursuant to such revision-order, the AO passed order of fresh\nassessment dated 15.06.2017 u/s

SHRI GOVIND DAS MUNDRA,INDORE vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 634/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

1 proceed to invoke the powers u/s 263 and pass an appropriate order, I deem it proper to give you an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 22. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice submitting as follows:- The assessee is earning income from Job work of engineering/vehicle parts in the name of his proprietary concern

SHRI MANISH MUNDRA,INDORE vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 635/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

1 proceed to invoke the powers u/s 263 and pass an appropriate order, I deem it proper to give you an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 22. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice submitting as follows:- The assessee is earning income from Job work of engineering/vehicle parts in the name of his proprietary concern

SHRI MANOJ MUNDRA,INDORE vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 637/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

1 proceed to invoke the powers u/s 263 and pass an appropriate order, I deem it proper to give you an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 22. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice submitting as follows:- The assessee is earning income from Job work of engineering/vehicle parts in the name of his proprietary concern

DHIRENDRA INTERNATIONAL (P) LTD.,NEEMUCH vs. PR. CIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 750/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

1 proceed to invoke the powers u/s 263 and pass an appropriate order, I deem it proper to give you an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 22. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice submitting as follows:- The assessee is earning income from Job work of engineering/vehicle parts in the name of his proprietary concern

M/S. CHARITRA GOLD PVT. LTD.,RATLAM vs. THE PR. CIT, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 517/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

1 proceed to invoke the powers u/s 263 and pass an appropriate order, I deem it proper to give you an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 22. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice submitting as follows:- The assessee is earning income from Job work of engineering/vehicle parts in the name of his proprietary concern

SHRI ADITYA MUNDRA,DEWAS vs. PCIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result all the appeals of the assessee(s) (i) Shri Aditya

ITA 632/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

Section 263Section 56(2)(viib)

1 proceed to invoke the powers u/s 263 and pass an appropriate order, I deem it proper to give you an opportunity of being heard in the matter. 22. The assessee duly replied to the above show cause notice submitting as follows:- The assessee is earning income from Job work of engineering/vehicle parts in the name of his proprietary concern

MADHYA PRADESH COUNSALTANCY ORGANISATION LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 461/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S M.P. Consultancy Acit-2(1) बनाम/ Organization Ltd., Bhopal Vs. Block -2, 3Rd Floor Paryawas Bhawan, Arera Hills Bhopal (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aabcm0090J Appellant By Shri M.K. Sharma, Ca Revenue By Smt. Vineeta Dube, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 13 .09.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad, A.M: This Appeal At The Instance Of Assessee Pertaining To A.Y. 2013-14 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Bhopal, (In Short ‘Cit(A)’), Dated 30.03.2017 Which Is Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961(Hereinafter Called As The ‘Act’) Framed On 23.-2.2016 By Acit- 2(1), Bhopal.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 224Section 271(1)(c)Section 36Section 37Section 56

viia) as per Rs.13,04,862/- para 3.6 Add: Income from Punjab National Bank not Rs.18,35,393/- offered to tax as per para 4.5 Assessed Total Income (Rounded off) Rs.1,17,71,160/- 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed. 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising