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.

241 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 250(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai725Delhi410Jaipur241Ahmedabad196Kolkata190Bangalore128Chennai126Indore116Surat114Raipur114Pune101Amritsar97Rajkot82Chandigarh73Hyderabad59Allahabad43Guwahati40Patna37Visakhapatnam35Lucknow34Nagpur33Cochin29Agra21Dehradun18Jabalpur18Panaji14Jodhpur14Cuttack6Varanasi4Ranchi2

Key Topics

Penalty70Addition to Income67Section 271(1)(c)60Section 14855Section 25051Section 14746Section 143(3)33Section 153C33Section 144

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 212/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

For Appellant: Shri C.L. Yadav, CA and Shri Vikas Yadav AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary
Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

250(6) of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-proseuction as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Premkumar Arjundas Luthra, HUF (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.) 3. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the penalty imposed

SUPERFINE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6,, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Showing 1–20 of 241 · Page 1 of 13

...
29
Limitation/Time-bar28
Condonation of Delay28
Section 271(1)(b)27
ITA 1502/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Apr 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena, CIT
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 35A

250 for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on\n21.08.2024 for A.Y. 2015-16.\n2. That the above order was served online on ITBA Portal on\n21.08.2024 which came into the knowledge of the management on\n13.12.2024 as the old management has not handed over the books\nof accounts, income tax records and other passwords

R P WOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 168/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 250Section 271Section 271ASection 274

250 of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2019-20. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. The orders passed by the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidences, facts and circumstances of the case and are therefore liable to be quashed

GHANSHYAM TAK,NAYA GHAR AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 167/JPR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 250Section 271Section 271ASection 274

250 of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2020-21. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. The orders passed by the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidences, facts and circumstances of the case and are therefore liable to be quashed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 1170/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/- 13 1178/JP/2025 2021-22 19.06.2025 Levy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act vide order dated 28.08.2023 for an amount of Rs. 6,99,87,788/- Against all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred cross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to CO/46/JP/2025. 2. As agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 1167/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/- 13 1178/JP/2025 2021-22 19.06.2025 Levy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act vide order dated 28.08.2023 for an amount of Rs. 6,99,87,788/- Against all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred cross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to CO/46/JP/2025. 2. As agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1169/JPR/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1178/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1168/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1176/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross\nobjections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

VISION JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 530/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 271(1)(c). 15 VISION JEWELLERS VS DCIT CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR In view of the above, penalty levied by the ld. AO deserves to be deleted as the same has been levied in a mechanical manner and without application of mind.’’ 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). 6

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1164/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross\nobjections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1165/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

ITA 1177/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250\n6,99,87,788\nTotal\n66,06,14,144\n24,39,82,885\n2.\nImposition of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of abovementioned acceptance\nand repayment of alleged unsecured loans\n2.1\nIn the assessment order, though the loans were added in the income of\nthe assessee, considering the same as same as \"Unexplained Business receipts\nor unaccounted income

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1166/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross\nobjections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

JAMNA DEVI SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 540/JPR/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 274, ld. AO has not clearly mentioned the limb, on the basis of which, penalty was proposed to be imposed. Ld. AO has simply issued a pre-printed notice without striking off the unnecessary portions of the notice (Concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of Income). If it was of the view that the 16 SMT. JAMNA

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1174/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2. As agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA no. 1168/JP/2025 for assessment year

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

ITA 1175/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 271DSection 271E

250/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA no. 1168/JP/2025 for assessment year 2017-18 and the connected\ncross objection of assessee on it numbered as CO no. 39/JP/2025 is taken

RAKESH KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 330/JPR/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Mar 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Gupta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 217BSection 271B

250, allowed appeal of assessee holding that notice issued by Assessing Officer under section 274 read with section 271 (1 )(c) was bad in law, as it did not specify under which limb of section 271 (1 )(c) penalty proceedings had been initiated, i.e., whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income – High Court

DAYARAM YADAV,JAIPUR vs. CIT(A), NFAC

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 382/JPR/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri C. L. Yadav (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 253Section 253(5)Section 271(1)(b)

250 of the Act. Merely stating of the fact that due it has not received the notices and that it is in appeal against the assessment order does not help the cause of the assessee. It was duty of the appellant to participate in the assessment proceedings failure to which attracted penalty u/s 271