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.

44 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi249Mumbai160Chennai104Jaipur61Kolkata44Bangalore34Ahmedabad27Visakhapatnam23Karnataka22Pune21Chandigarh18Indore18Lucknow16Hyderabad15Agra11Rajkot8Raipur8Dehradun7Nagpur6Jabalpur4Allahabad4Cochin3Cuttack3Surat3Amritsar3SC2

Key Topics

Section 234E90Section 200A48Section 271(1)(c)43Section 15442Section 143(3)31Section 271(1)24Penalty20TDS18Addition to Income

DCIT, C.C. I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMARNATH SHROFF, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

ITA 1494/KOL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Pande, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

rectification has the effect of allowing the Appeal also for all the four assessment years which was dismissed previously by the Order dated 26-8-2009 on an apparently erroneous finding of fact.” 16. This order of CIT(A) was passed on 26.05.2010. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) dated 26.05.2010 passed u/s 154

Showing 1–20 of 44 · Page 1 of 3

18
Deduction17
Section 132(4)13
Section 153A12

AMAR NATH SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

ITA 1797/KOL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Pande, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

rectification has the effect of allowing the Appeal also for all the four assessment years which was dismissed previously by the Order dated 26-8-2009 on an apparently erroneous finding of fact.” 16. This order of CIT(A) was passed on 26.05.2010. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) dated 26.05.2010 passed u/s 154

JAGDAMBA JEWELLERS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-XIII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 910/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Mar 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act at Rs.60,246/-. Since, the rectification petition filed by the assessee was disposed of by the AO in the order u/s 271(1)(c) itself, therefore, the assessee has filed two separate appeals against the one order. One appeal has been filed against the rejection of petition u/s 154

SRI NARENDRA N. THACKER,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, C.C.XXIV, KOLKATA

ITA Nos.1786-

ITA 1786/KOL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 154Section 271(1)

rectification petition was preferred before the Learned CIT(A) and assessee adduced evidences for payment of taxes. The Learned CIT(A) after obtaining confirmation from the Learned AO with regard to the payment of taxes thereon, sough to rectify the appellate order passed by his predecessor on 16.7.2009 and gave a finding that the assessee had indeed paid

GAUTAM KUMAR MITRA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 54, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 7/KOL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No. 07/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCA & Shri Amit Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 44A

Penalty u/s 271 (1 )(c) of the Act is therefore innposable as regards concealment amounting to Rs. 19,58,731.81. 6. Regarding the second point of concealment of income from house property. the explanation forwarded is that the addition made in the assessment was not lawful because the assessee followed cash basis accounting, It was stated that the assessee

SUKHBIR SINGH DHUPIA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.-CIRCLE-39, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2735/KOL/2013[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jul 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Vigyaneshwar Nath Datta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 94(7)

rectification proceedings u/s 154 dated 3.5.2007 wherein the disallowance u/s 94(7) of the Act was reduced to Rs. 6,22,248/-. The Learned AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271

SMT. MANJU PANDEY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1831/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.T.Yadava, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification proceedins, as these documents were not available during the original assessment proceedings, the levy of penalty may not be justified. After considering the facts of the case as well as explanation and evidences produced by the assessee, we are of the view that it is not a fit case for levy of penalty U/s 271

SMT. MANJU PANDEY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1833/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.T.Yadava, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification proceedins, as these documents were not available during the original assessment proceedings, the levy of penalty may not be justified. After considering the facts of the case as well as explanation and evidences produced by the assessee, we are of the view that it is not a fit case for levy of penalty U/s 271

SMT. MANJU PANDEY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-44(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1832/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.T.Yadava, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

rectification proceedins, as these documents were not available during the original assessment proceedings, the levy of penalty may not be justified. After considering the facts of the case as well as explanation and evidences produced by the assessee, we are of the view that it is not a fit case for levy of penalty U/s 271

SUNIL AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1397/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shris.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Dr.A.L. Saini, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: ShriA.K.Tibrewal–FCAFor Respondent: ShriSnehanshu Biswas-JCIT-SR DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 68

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) is hereby initiated separately for the amounts of Rs.48,50,000/- and Rs.1,80,100/-. 4. Aggrieved from the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who has also confirmed the order passed by the AO by observing the following:- “7.8 In the case of appellant

SWARNAPROVA DUTTA, L/H : SHRI UJJAL DUTTA,BIRBHUM vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), SURI , BIRBHUM

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2212/KOL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. Nos. 2210 - 2212/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Swarnaprova Dutta.................................……………………………………………………….......Appellant L/H: Sri Ujjal Dutta Netaji Road, Bolpur, Birbhum – 731 204. [Pan: Aiipd 0957 H] Ito, Ward 3(1)Suri...................……………………………………………………….................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, Suri, Birbhum – 731 101. Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 07, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 28, 2019 Order

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) was challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). There was however a delay of 15 days on the part of the assessee in filing the said appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no application filed by the assessee seeking condonation of the said delay

SWARNAPROVA DUTTA, L/H : SHRI UJJAL DUTTA,BIRBHUM vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), SURI , BIRBHUM

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2210/KOL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. Nos. 2210 - 2212/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Swarnaprova Dutta.................................……………………………………………………….......Appellant L/H: Sri Ujjal Dutta Netaji Road, Bolpur, Birbhum – 731 204. [Pan: Aiipd 0957 H] Ito, Ward 3(1)Suri...................……………………………………………………….................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, Suri, Birbhum – 731 101. Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 07, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 28, 2019 Order

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) was challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). There was however a delay of 15 days on the part of the assessee in filing the said appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no application filed by the assessee seeking condonation of the said delay

SWARNAPROVA DUTTA, L/H : SHRI UJJAL DUTTA,BIRBHUM vs. ITO, WARD - 3(1), SURI , BIRBHUM

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2211/KOL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. Nos. 2210 - 2212/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2005-06 Swarnaprova Dutta.................................……………………………………………………….......Appellant L/H: Sri Ujjal Dutta Netaji Road, Bolpur, Birbhum – 731 204. [Pan: Aiipd 0957 H] Ito, Ward 3(1)Suri...................……………………………………………………….................Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, Suri, Birbhum – 731 101. Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri C.J. Singh, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 07, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 28, 2019 Order

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) was challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). There was however a delay of 15 days on the part of the assessee in filing the said appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no application filed by the assessee seeking condonation of the said delay

DCIT, CC-I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHEO KUMAR KAJARIA, KOLKATA

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue for all the assessment years are dismissed

ITA 1425/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/Shri A.K TibrewalFor Respondent: Shri S.Dutta, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 154Section 271(1)

penalty on account of Explanation -5 to Section 271(1) when the assessee’s case does not come under the purview of the exceptions provided therein. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the cae the Ld. CIT(A) , Central-III, Kolkata has erred in law as well as facts in allowing assessee’s rectification application moved u/s 154

ACIT, CIR-27, HALDIA, PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. SHRI PRABAL KANTI PRAMANIK, PURBA MEDINIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue, is dismissed

ITA 821/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Oct 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.821/Kol/2015 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 A.C.I.T, Circle – 27, Haldia Vs. Shri Prabal Kantipramanik Dubey House, Basudevpur, Garkamalpur, Mahishadal, Khanjanchak, Haldia, Dist: Purbamedinipur, W.B, Purbamedinipur – 721 602. 721628 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aeypp4276P (Revenue/Department) .. (Assessee) Revenue/Department By :Shri M. K. Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Assessee By :Shri T.P. Kaur, Fca सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/08/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/10/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue,Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata, In Appeal No.252/Cit(A)-7/C-27/14-15, Dated 13.03.2015, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 05.03.2014. 2. Before Us, The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Kaur, FCAFor Respondent: Shri M. K. Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 44A

154, dated11/11/2012, the CIT(A)-XXXIII had directed the A.Oto allow credit for income tax paid in Oman at the conversion rate prevailing on the date ofpayment. The Assessing Shri Prabal KantiPramanik Assessment Year: 2008-09 Officer based on the above discussions, concluded that the action of the assessee is liable for penalty u/s 271

ACIT(IT), CIRCLE - 1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. JOY PARTNERSHIP MINING CENTRE, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1325/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am A.C.I.T. (International Taxation), Vs. M/S Joy Partnership Mining Circle-1 (2), Kolkata Centre Room No-206, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar 85/1 Topsia Road, ( South) Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700046 Kolkata-7000107. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfj 6427 H (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri G.Hangshing, CITFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar Lal, AR
Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271B

penalty U/s 271(1) (c ) of the Act of Rs.2,50,00,000/-. 8. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before us. The ld. DR for the revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the AO which we have already noted in our above para and is not being repeated

M/S. LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR- 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2013-14 in ITA No

ITA 927/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 927 & 2400/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manoneet Dalal &For Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)

rectification order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s. 92CA(3) and 144C(5) of the Act dated 8.3.2017 pursuant to the 154 petition of the assessee and arrived at the revised PLI of comparables after taking into account working capital adjustments as under:- Sl.No. Comparable companies PLI as per Corrected Revised PLI order of the PLI post on TPO dt. directions

M/S. LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the Asst Year 2013-14 in ITA No

ITA 2400/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A Nos. 927 & 2400/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manoneet Dalal &For Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 144C(5)

rectification order u/s 92CA(5) r.w.s. 92CA(3) and 144C(5) of the Act dated 8.3.2017 pursuant to the 154 petition of the assessee and arrived at the revised PLI of comparables after taking into account working capital adjustments as under:- Sl.No. Comparable companies PLI as per Corrected Revised PLI order of the PLI post on TPO dt. directions

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN & SONS (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1244/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1237/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Jain Infra Projects Ltd., Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Kolkata-700017 Sarani, Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb 9831 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1244/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Manoj Kumar Jain & Sons Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, Kolkata (Huf) Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Sarani, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaihm9669P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, JCIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

154 dated 08.03.2010 was filed in respect and the assessee also paid the balance tax of Rs.24,93,675/- on 26.02.2010. Copy of the rectification petition dated 08.03.2010 along with the copy of the challan is produced. Therefore, as per the assessee there is no demand before passing of the penalty order, hence penalty U/s 271AAA

JAIN INFRA PROJECTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1237/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1237/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Jain Infra Projects Ltd., Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra Kolkata-700017 Sarani, Kolkata-700001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccb 9831 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1244/Kol/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) Manoj Kumar Jain & Sons Vs. Acit, Cc-Iv, Kolkata (Huf) Poddar Court, 18, Rabindra 39, Shakespeare Sarai, Sarani, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaihm9669P .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, JCIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

154 dated 08.03.2010 was filed in respect and the assessee also paid the balance tax of Rs.24,93,675/- on 26.02.2010. Copy of the rectification petition dated 08.03.2010 along with the copy of the challan is produced. Therefore, as per the assessee there is no demand before passing of the penalty order, hence penalty U/s 271AAA