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.

2 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 92Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai17Delhi11Hyderabad6Kolkata5Bangalore3Pune3Chennai2Jaipur2Karnataka1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)3Section 14A3Section 92C2Section 2632Section 142(1)2Disallowance2

M/S ETERNAL HEART CARE CENTRE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE PVT. LTD. ,3A, JAGATPURA ROAD, NEAR JAWAHAR CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 263/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 271A

92A of the Act. So far as loan of Rs.12,55,000/- taken from Dr. Shamim Sharma & interest payment of Rs.7,42,793/- is concerned, same has not been reported in Form 3CEB under bonafide belief that these transactions are routed through NRO account of Dr. Shamim Sharma, hence not reportable. The assessee further submitted that section

M/S CENTURY INFRA POWER P. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 169/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Oct 2019AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Bhanwar Singh (JCIT)
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 32(1)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) were also initiated for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and one of the ground raised was relating to passing the impugned order u/s 143(3)/143C directly without passing the draft proposed order ignoring the provisions of section