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.

104 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,199Delhi1,060Ahmedabad382Jaipur330Kolkata227Chennai219Bangalore198Hyderabad173Pune153Indore129Surat124Karnataka104Chandigarh85Visakhapatnam70Raipur61Lucknow39Nagpur36Calcutta35Rajkot31Amritsar31Cuttack30Ranchi28Agra23Cochin15Patna14Dehradun12Jodhpur11Guwahati6Panaji6Jabalpur5Telangana5Allahabad4Varanasi4SC3Gauhati1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 260A6Section 153C4Section 1444Section 143(3)3Section 1322Section 153D2Section 115J2Section 271(1)(c)2Penalty

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.WINTAC LTD.,

The appeal is allowed in part

ITA/910/2006HC Karnataka19 Sept 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 260ASection 271(1)(c)

U/s. 260A of I.T. Act, 1961 arising out of Order dated 02-01-2006 passed in ITA.No.81/Bang/2005 for the year 2001-02, praying that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to formulate the substantial questions of law stated therein and allow the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the ITAT, Bangalore in ITA.No.81/Bang/2005 dated

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. M/S MINITECHS

ITA/714/2015HC Karnataka01 Apr 2016

B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

Showing 1–20 of 104 · Page 1 of 6

2
Survey u/s 133A2
Bench:
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 260

u/s 148 and had also duly filed the revised computation of income. The AO’s view is that “when the rental income was already offered to tax, it was in the knowledge of the 6 assessee that the capital gains are also attracted on taking possession of the built up area”. As already stated, the issue was debatable

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BPL SANYO FINANCE LTD

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is

ITA/652/2006HC Karnataka11 Sept 2013

Bench: The Tribunal Was Arising From The Order Dated 4Th June 2004 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Bangalore (For Short “The

Section 115JSection 133Section 139Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

capital merely to save 35% thereof as a tax. To add to this, 15 the assessee pays tax on entire lease rent which effectively and substantially reduces any tax advantage available by way of claim of depreciation. In the net result it will still loose more than 65% of its own money, which no person will ever do. Thus, there

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

ITA/705/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) and 271F were initiated. 12 12. It is observed in paragraph 5.4 of the order dated 31.03.2013, that in the previous years, the assessee has opted to club the income of minor children with her income, as the TDS deducted from the Banks are in the name of assessee. Therefore, the income

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

ITA/704/2018HC Karnataka31 Mar 2023

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 153CSection 153DSection 260A

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) and 271F were initiated. 10.It is observed in paragraph 5.4 of the order dated 31.03.2013 that in the previous years, the assessee has opted to club the income of minor children with her income, as the TDS 11 deducted from the Banks are in the name of assessee. Therefore, the income of minor

RAMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/27625/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SRI SANTOSH A SHETTY vs. THE STATE OF KARANTAKA

WP/29668/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SRI. GURUPRASAD vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

WP/8176/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

MR C V MANJUNATHA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/235/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

R NAGARATHNA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/8187/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

MR JAI KISHAN VIRWANI vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/34675/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

P. D. PONNAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/12975/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SMT. V.KRISHNAMMA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/36324/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

S B JAGADEESH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/51160/2017HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SRI SANJAY JAYARAM vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/15270/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

BORALINGAIAH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/33339/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SRI B S PATIL vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/23435/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

B YUVARAJ vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/56988/2018HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

RAJAPPA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/50955/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SRI S BAGHIRATHA vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

WP/22935/2019HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,B.A.PATIL

U/S 9 OF THE KARNATAKA LAND GRABBING PROHIBITION ACT 2011, PRODUCED AND MARKED ANNEXURE-D AND ETC. IN W.P. NO. 23515/2019: BETWEEN: 1 . SMT BHAGYAMMA W/O MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/4, 1ST MAIN ROAD MARENAHALLI, VIJAYANAGARA 256 BENGALURU-560 040. 2 . SRI.D.SIDDARAJU S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 3 . SRI.D.HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE C.K.DODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS