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.

88 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 142(1)(iii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi715Mumbai512Jaipur171Ahmedabad157Indore155Hyderabad119Karnataka104Bangalore100Kolkata88Pune86Surat85Chandigarh77Chennai66Rajkot62Raipur54Allahabad45Lucknow36Calcutta36Amritsar34Visakhapatnam33Cochin27Agra14Cuttack9Patna9Guwahati9Jodhpur8Nagpur8SC5Ranchi5Rajasthan2Panaji2Telangana2Varanasi2Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)63Section 14759Section 143(2)57Section 143(3)56Addition to Income56Section 14847Section 6844Penalty38Section 250

DCIT, CIR-11(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S P C CHANDRA (JEWELLERS) PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1197/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Feb 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2011-12 Dct, Crcle-11(2), V/S. M/S P.C. Chandra P-7, Chowringhee (Jewellers), Pvt. Ltd., Square, Kolkta-69 49C, Gaiahat Road, Kolkata-19 [Pan No.Aabcp 8654 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 11-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 02-02-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 06.07.2015. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-11, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.08.2013 For Assessment Year 2011-12. Revenue Has Raised Following Ground:- “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Assessee Ld. Cit Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Of Rs.23,68,786/- Imposed U/S. 271(1)(C) Of The It Act. 1961. 2. That The Appellant Craves For Leave To Add, Delete Or Modify Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal Before Or All The Time Of Hearing.”

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

142(1) dated 16.04.2013 requiring the assessee to furnish the certain details. 4. The AO on perusal of the details filed by the assessee observed that it has claimed depreciation in the computation of income for ₹78,95,954/- on the land for ₹7,89,59,536/- purchased during the year. On being confronted to the impugned issue, assessee conceded

Showing 1–20 of 88 · Page 1 of 5

32
Section 271A32
Disallowance20
Undisclosed Income17

SRI SURYA PRAKASH BAGLA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CEN. CIR-VII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 398/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 398/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Surya Prakash Bagla -Vs- Dcit, Central Circle-Vii, Kolkata [Pan: Aebpb 4558 F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tiwari, CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 80D

142(1) of the Act dated 7.7.2010 itself, the assessee in order to escape from the taxation at higher rate and for the purpose of savings on interest and immunity from penalty, had come forward to offer the cash component of share sale consideration of Rs 7,40,90,000/- in the revised return. Hence there was malafide

ACIT, CIR-29, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. PRAKASH KUMAR MOHTA (HUF), KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 736/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2009-10

Section 10(32)Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

Section 10(32) of the Act in place of 10(38) of the Act. Subsequently, notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued upon the assessee Thereafter notice u/s. 142(1) dated 27.01.2011 was served upon the assessee dated 29.06.2011 for fixing the date of hearing dated 08.07.2011. In compliance thereto assessee appeared before Assessing Officer dated

SUSHIL KUMAR PAUL,SILIGURI vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2, SILIGURI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2274/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Sushil Kumar Paul Acit, Circle-2, Siliguri. C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Vs. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700 069. (Pan: Akfpp 4837 K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Siliguri Dated 23.08.2019 For A.Y. 2016-17. The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. For That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs. 23,70,000/- Imposed By The Ao By Wrongly Invoking The Provisions Of Section 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act.

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 271A

iii) on or before the specified date— (A) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income; and (B) furnishes the return of income for the specified previous year declaring such undisclosed income therein; (b) a sum computed at the rate of twenty per cent of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year

SRI BHASKAR GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-2(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 285/KOL/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2016AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

iii) The notices u/s.153A were served upon assessee on 10.10.2011 allowing the assesse thirty (30) days' time to file the returned income where the assesse could have exercised his option of willingness to offer an additional income as per his commitment u/s.132(4) of I.T. Act, 1961 in respect of undisclosed bank account transactions for each relevant assessment years covered

COSMAT TRADERS (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 457/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2021AY 2012-13
Section 120Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, dt. 16/03/2020, it came to know about Act, dt. 16/03/2020, it came to know about the ex-parte orders. He also pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case orders. He also pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case orders

M/S. VIJAY WIRE INDUSTRIES,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 44(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1552/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Smt. Alka Gupta Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata T/2A/1, Gurudas Dutta Garden Lane, 3, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – Ultadanga, Kolkata – 700 067. 700 067. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aczpg 9407 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & M/S. Vijay Wire Industries Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata T/2A/1, Gurudas Dutta Garden Lane, 3, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – Ultadanga, Kolkata – 700 067. 700 067. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfv 2057 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

142(1) of the Act and duly served upon the assessee. In compliance with the said notices, Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, A/R of the assessee appeared from time to time to explain the return of income and other documents. It may be noted that assessee had made compliance of various notices during the assessment proceedings and submitted the required details

SMT. ALKA GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD -44(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1553/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Smt. Alka Gupta Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata T/2A/1, Gurudas Dutta Garden Lane, 3, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – Ultadanga, Kolkata – 700 067. 700 067. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aczpg 9407 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & M/S. Vijay Wire Industries Vs. Ito, Ward-44(2), Kolkata T/2A/1, Gurudas Dutta Garden Lane, 3, Govt. Place(West), Kolkata – Ultadanga, Kolkata – 700 067. 700 067. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacfv 2057 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

142(1) of the Act and duly served upon the assessee. In compliance with the said notices, Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, A/R of the assessee appeared from time to time to explain the return of income and other documents. It may be noted that assessee had made compliance of various notices during the assessment proceedings and submitted the required details

ARTDECO COLLECTION PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-9(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 174/KOL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं"या: 174 / कोल / 2022 िनधा"रण वष"ः 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C

iii. That your appellant craves leave to add other grounds/further grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 2. Though the Registry has pointed out that the appeal is time barred, however, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Miscellaneous Application

M/S VENKATESWAR MEDICARE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1416/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2006-07 is also set aside and quashed. The application being G.A.No. 81 of 2010 is also allowed. The case of the assessee is also covered by the decision of Co-ordinate Bench decision in the case of Amiya Gopal Dutta (supra). For the sake of ready reference

M/S VENKATESWAR MEDICARE PVT. LTD.,ITO, WARD-2(1) vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1417/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am& Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm]

Section 119Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68

penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2006-07 is also set aside and quashed. The application being G.A.No. 81 of 2010 is also allowed. The case of the assessee is also covered by the decision of Co-ordinate Bench decision in the case of Amiya Gopal Dutta (supra). For the sake of ready reference

DCIT, CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTROSTEEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 409/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

142(1) of the Act, along with a detailed questionnaire, on several dates were issued and 2 ITA Nos.406-410/Kol/2016 Electrosteel Castings Ltd., AYs- 2005-06 & 2009-10 served upon the assessee. In response to the notices and subsequent discussions in hearings, the assessee duly filed the required information and submissions from time to time. Further, the assessee has entered inter

DCIT, CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTROSTEEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 408/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

142(1) of the Act, along with a detailed questionnaire, on several dates were issued and 2 ITA Nos.406-410/Kol/2016 Electrosteel Castings Ltd., AYs- 2005-06 & 2009-10 served upon the assessee. In response to the notices and subsequent discussions in hearings, the assessee duly filed the required information and submissions from time to time. Further, the assessee has entered inter

DCIT, CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTROSTEEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 406/KOL/2016[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

142(1) of the Act, along with a detailed questionnaire, on several dates were issued and 2 ITA Nos.406-410/Kol/2016 Electrosteel Castings Ltd., AYs- 2005-06 & 2009-10 served upon the assessee. In response to the notices and subsequent discussions in hearings, the assessee duly filed the required information and submissions from time to time. Further, the assessee has entered inter

DCIT, CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTROSTEEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 407/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

142(1) of the Act, along with a detailed questionnaire, on several dates were issued and 2 ITA Nos.406-410/Kol/2016 Electrosteel Castings Ltd., AYs- 2005-06 & 2009-10 served upon the assessee. In response to the notices and subsequent discussions in hearings, the assessee duly filed the required information and submissions from time to time. Further, the assessee has entered inter

DCIT, CC-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ELECTROSTEEEL CASTINGS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 410/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144CSection 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 92C

142(1) of the Act, along with a detailed questionnaire, on several dates were issued and 2 ITA Nos.406-410/Kol/2016 Electrosteel Castings Ltd., AYs- 2005-06 & 2009-10 served upon the assessee. In response to the notices and subsequent discussions in hearings, the assessee duly filed the required information and submissions from time to time. Further, the assessee has entered inter

RISHI KUMAR AGARWAL,SIKKIM vs. DCIT, CC-XXII, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1988/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: The Bench Is Squarely Covered By The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court. The Ld.Ar Submits That A Paper Book Containing Pages 1 To 44 Was Filed On 29- 03-2017 & Referred To Page No-7 Where A Copy Of The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court Was Placed & Urged The Bench To Allow The Appeal In Terms Of This Decision. We Find That The Issue Before Us Is Covered By The Decision Of Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ssa’S Emerald Meadows Supra & We Proceed To Hear The Case & Dispose Of The Same By Perusing The Material On Record. 3. The Only Issue Is To Be Decided As To Whether The Cit-A Justified In Confirming The Impugned Penalties Imposed By The Ao U/S. 271(1) (C) Of The Act In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: None appeared for the Revenue
Section 10Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

III, Kolkata for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10, wherein he confirmed the penalties of Rs.8,54,903/- and Rs.7,46,067/- imposed by the AO u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act respectively. 2. None appeared on behalf of the revenue nor was any application filed seeking adjournment. The Ld.AR submits that the issue before the Bench

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, SILIGURI, SILIGURI vs. M/S PRAKASH DISTILLERY & CHEMICALS(P) LTD., SILIGURI

In the result, both the appeal of revenue and the cross objection of assessee are dismissed

ITA 1717/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

142(1) were issued and served on the assessee. In response, the assessee produced books of accounts, bank statements and other supporting documents which were examined on test check basis. On scrutiny, the AO found discrepancy in sundry creditors namely M/s. Ajay Kumar Bijoy Kumar appearing in the books of account of the assessee, the closing balance booked against

KRISHNA CHANDRA DAS,TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS SOUTH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1804/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2019-20 Krishna Chandra Das..……………..………………….……….……….……Appellant Ramkrishnanagar Laskarpur, Alipore, 24 Parganas (S), W.B - 743515. [Pan: Ajapd6700B] Vs. Ito, Ward-25(1), Kolkata………….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri B. B. Payra, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Dipu Koley, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 27, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 02, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.06.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2019–20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed Original Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2019-20. In The Absence Of Voluntary Compliance, The Assessing Officer Initiated Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act By Making Following Additions:

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 15Section 250Section 272A(1)(d)Section 45Section 56Section 69ASection 69B

iii. Salary Received u/s 15 amounting to Rs. 34,64,292/-. iv. Unexplained Investment U/s 69B amounting to Rs.70,79,999/-. Krishna Chandra Das v. Unexplained Money U/s 69A amounting to Rs. 19,64,920/- 2.1 During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued statutory notices but the assessee remained non-responsive, consequently the Assessing Officer issued multiple show-cause

GUNJA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD,PURULIA vs. PCIT,, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 110/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Gunja Samabay Krishi Pcit, Asansol Unnayan Samity Ltd. Vill. Gunja, Golbera, P.S. Vs. Joypur, Dist. Purulia, Pin. 723103 Pan: Aabag 2110 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M. Goenka, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sudipta Guha, CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(2)(i)

142(1) of the I.T. Act 1961 you have stated that you have claimed deduction amounting to Rs. 32,31,576/- under section 80(P)(2)(a)(i) of the I.T. Act 1961 But on examination of the materials on record it is noticed that you have deposited/invested in Bank other than co-operative Bank and earned interest income amounting