Search: penalty u/s 271 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

4 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 274clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi502 Mumbai428 Jaipur165 Surat125 Chennai101 Bangalore97 Ahmedabad81 Hyderabad80 Kolkata75 Indore71 Pune67 Allahabad44 Ranchi42 Rajkot41 Chandigarh40 Raipur34 Amritsar30 Cochin23 Visakhapatnam20 Nagpur17 Patna16 Guwahati14 Agra14 Dehradun12 Lucknow11 Cuttack11 Jodhpur7 Jabalpur4 Panaji2 Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)11 Section 272A(1)(d)8 Section 1445 Section 2744 Penalty4 Addition to Income4 Cash Deposit3 Section 2502 Section 271A2

SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR RAI,KATNI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2 , KATNI

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 96/JAB/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. K P Dewani, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Mehrotra, JCIT-DR

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 271(1)(c) of the I.T Act 1961. 7. We have gone through the penalty notice issued by the AO u/s. 274

AMIT KUMAR YADAV,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SEONI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 166/JAB/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed

ITAT Jabalpur

28 Aug 2025

AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G.N. Purohit, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)

u/s 142(1). The penalty of Rs. 50000/- should be quashed in toto. 4. That The applicant reserves his right to raise additional ground or grounds of appeal those may arise at the time of hearing of this appeal.” 2. The facts of the case are, that the return of income of the assessee for the assessment year

AMIT KUMAR YADAV,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SEONI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 168/JAB/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G.N. Purohit, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)

u/s 142(1). The penalty of Rs. 50000/- should be quashed in toto. 4. That The applicant reserves his right to raise additional ground or grounds of appeal those may arise at the time of hearing of this appeal.” 2. The facts of the case are, that the return of income of the assessee for the assessment year

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH,REWA vs. ITO WARD SINGRAULI, SINGRAULI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 54/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevivek Kumar Singh, Vs. Ito, 14/357, Sanjay Nagar Singrauli, Rewa-486001, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 2Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 274(2)Section 3

274(2) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That no proper opportunity was allowed to the appellant to prove his case. 4. The appellant prays to alter, amend, add or delete any of the grounds of appeal. 5. The penalty was levied by the assessment unit u/s 272A(1)(d). While furnishing the details of appeal there is no column