Search: penalty u/s 271

1 result for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 50C(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai61 Delhi55 Ahmedabad26 Jaipur20 Surat10 Lucknow10 Agra9 Dehradun7 Hyderabad6 Indore6 Chennai6 Visakhapatnam6 Bangalore6 Pune4 Chandigarh4 Kolkata3 Nagpur3 Rajkot3 Jodhpur2 Allahabad2 Jabalpur1 Raipur1 Patna1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)5

CHHAYA MASURKAR,BALAGHAT vs. NFAC, ITO BALAGHAT, BALAGHAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 61/JAB/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshrachhaya Masurkar V. National Faceless Appeal 1, Ward No. 9, Ram Mandir Center (Nfac) Road, Katangi, Balaghat (Mp)- Delhi (Jurisdiction Officer, 481445. Income Tax Officer, Balaghat (Mp)-110001. Pan:Cakpm8662A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, Ca Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) O R D E R (A) The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)- Delhi, Dated 23.02.2024 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Of Appeal Of The Assessee Are As Under: -

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Bagrecha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 69A

2 of 3 speaking defeating the purpose ’ of notice in relevance and therefore, the penalty. proceedings qua relevant addition is not sustainable in law as there was no valid initiation of penalty proceedings for relevant addition. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on the facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the imposition of penalty