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.

40 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 40aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi306Mumbai192Ahmedabad53Jaipur52Kolkata40Bangalore37Chennai36Hyderabad35Indore31Rajkot28Pune27Visakhapatnam24Chandigarh23Raipur21Surat20Allahabad18Amritsar16Cuttack9Lucknow5Nagpur3Jodhpur2Dehradun2Ranchi1Patna1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)38Section 143(3)36Section 115J24Section 27422Addition to Income19Section 4018Section 271(1)17Penalty16Section 263

MS. LEELA MONDAL,NORTH 24 PARGANAS vs. I.T.O, WD -50(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2383/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: ShriH. K. Mridha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Alam, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and levied penalty. The Tribunal reduced the penalty. On further appeal to the High Court: 3 Ms. Leela Mondal AY 2008-09 'Held, that the assessee had shown "Long Term Capital Gain" and claimed exemption but transaction has been disclosed in the return. There was no concealment of income

Showing 1–20 of 40 · Page 1 of 2

13
Deduction12
Disallowance10
Depreciation10

SUBRATA MOITRA,DURGAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1827/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(3)Section 68

40A(3) of the Act. In the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act the AO held that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income to the tune of Rs. 33,04,612/- (1623,931 + 16,80,681) and a impose the penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) of the Act of Rs. 10,21,124/-. 4. Aggrieved

M/S RISHI F. L. ON SHOP,MURSHIDABAD vs. ITO, WD-4, MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 320/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 271(1)Section 274Section 68Section 69C

section 69C and 40A(3) of the I.T Act. 2. Whether on the fact and in the circumstances the ld. CIT(Appeal) is justified by confirming the penalty U/s. 271

D.C.I.T.CIR - VIII,KOL, KOLKATA vs. SHRI RAM CHANDRA AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed as stated above

ITA 1700/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Chhaparia,FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Md. S.S Alam, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 271(1)

u/s. 10(38) of the Act in the original return of income. Hence, it can be safely concluded that the assessee has disclosed the transaction of shares completely before the Income-tax department in the return of income. We find that following case laws support the facts of the assessee:- ITA No.1700/Kol/2012- 4 C-AM Sh.Ram Ch.Agarwal

BINOD KUMAR BURNWAL,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD - 1(3), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1864/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Binod Kumar Burnwal…………………….…….............................………………………..……….………..Appellant Prop: Anandlok Infocom Bangram, Nutandanga Gogla Dist-Burdwan – 713 383 [Pan : Aizpb 0692 A] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Kolkata......................................................……………….…..Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 40A(3)

271/- deposit in party's bank account and the Provision is covered by Rule 6DD, as such his finding is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal. 7. For that the interest u/s 234B charged mechanically is wrong & illegal. 8. For that the appellant reserves the right to adduce any further ground or grounds, if necessary, at or before the hearing

VIVEKANANDA HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

In the result, the appeal of assesse is allowed

ITA 875/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: The Cit- It Was Contended That There Was No Deliberate Omission On The Part Of Assesse In Concealing The Income Or Furnishing Inaccurate Particulars Of Income & Placed Reliance On The Decisions Of The Hon’Ble Apex Court In The Cases Of T. Ashok Pai Vs. Cit Reported In 292 Itr 11(2007) (Sc) & Cit Vs. Reliance Petro Products P.Ltd Reported In 322 Itr (201) 158(Sc) Respectively.

For Appellant: D.K. Sen, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 80I

section 271(1)(c). It is further seen that the factual statement made by the appellant in the income return were found correct but the disallowance has been made due to legal fictions. In respect of ESIC payment due but not paid, in case of PF due but not paid. Neither it as inaccurate particular of income

KOLKATA PORT TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 35, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 369/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

KOLKATA PORT TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 35, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 368/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

KOLKATA PORT TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 35, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 367/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

DCIT, CIRCLE - 35, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. KOLKATA PORT TRUST , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 452/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

DCIT, CIRCLE - 35, KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. KOLKATA PORT TRUST , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 453/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

271(1)(c) in the printed form without specifically mentioning whether the proceedings are initiated on the ground of concealment of income or on account of furnishing of inaccurate particulars is valid and legal? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Authority was legal and valid? The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court held in the negative and against

NEGUN UNION CO- OP AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O WD - 2(2),BURDWAN, BURDWAN

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1100/KOL/2013[.2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2016

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 40A(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

40A(3) of the Act for an amount of Rs.2.30 lakhs and the addition was confirmed for Rs.46,000/- but at the appellate stage Ld. CIT(A) reduced the addition at Rs. 20,000/-. 2) The assessee, during the year also earned its income from the non- members which is in contravention of the provisions of Section

D.C.I.T CIR - 3,KOLATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MANTORA OIL PRODUCTS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2252/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40A(2)

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(10© of the act and prosecution proceedings u/s. 276C, 277A r.w.s. 278B of the Act. g) Directed the AO to verify the rent paid by assessee amounting to Rs.15.96 lakhs from the TDS documents provided in the assessment proceedings; h) Directed the AO to verify the professional charges and conveyance charges amounting to Rs.19

ANJALI JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-IV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2252/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 263Section 40A(2)

penalty proceedings u/s. 271(10© of the act and prosecution proceedings u/s. 276C, 277A r.w.s. 278B of the Act. g) Directed the AO to verify the rent paid by assessee amounting to Rs.15.96 lakhs from the TDS documents provided in the assessment proceedings; h) Directed the AO to verify the professional charges and conveyance charges amounting to Rs.19

BHABESH MAJUMDAR,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-45, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1933/KOL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravia.Y 2009-10

For Appellant: Dr Somnath Ghosh, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT, ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271(1)

penalty by relying on various case laws. 6. Before us the ld. AR submits that details of short term capital loss and long term capital loss were filed during original assessment proceedings, which was accepted by the AO u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The mistake regarding short term capital loss/gain in place of long term capital loss/gain and long

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AXIS OVERSEAS LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2425/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc 1(1), Kolkata Axis Overseas Limited Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 21A, Shakespeare Sarani, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700107, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca7497L Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 03.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

Penalty U/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately for concealment of income by way of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. So, for sake of consistency in department stand on the issue, addition of notional interest is made @ 12% amounting to Rs 2,67,75,667/- on total advances of Rs 22,31,30,558/-. 1. It is pertinent

DIPAK KUMAR DEY,HOOGHLY vs. CIT, KOLKATA-9, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 768/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 143Section 234BSection 263Section 271Section 40Section 40A

penalty proceedings under section 271 (I)(c) for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income by the assessee. Subsequent perusal of the assessment record revealed that during the relevant year the assessee made multiple cash payments of Rs. 20,000/- each on different dates to M/s Johar & Co. (Wine Sales) Pvt. Ltd. 3. After listing out the payments above

M/S VODAFONE EAST LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LIMITED),KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-7, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 431/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

40A(7) of IT Act unless the gratuity fund is approved. It is an admitted fact that the grauit9y fund of appellant is not approved and therefore appellant cannot claimed in respect of contribution to this fund. A proper contribution can be made only after the approval.” Further, aggrieved by this order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee has come

ACIT, CIRCLE - 7, KOLKATA vs. HUTCHISON TELECOM EAST LIMITED, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 343/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

40A(7) of IT Act unless the gratuity fund is approved. It is an admitted fact that the grauit9y fund of appellant is not approved and therefore appellant cannot claimed in respect of contribution to this fund. A proper contribution can be made only after the approval.” Further, aggrieved by this order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee has come

M/S. VODAFONE ESSAR EAST LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 7, KOLKATA

343/K/2009 04-05 Revenue dismissed

ITA 357/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80I

40A(7) of IT Act unless the gratuity fund is approved. It is an admitted fact that the grauit9y fund of appellant is not approved and therefore appellant cannot claimed in respect of contribution to this fund. A proper contribution can be made only after the approval.” Further, aggrieved by this order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee has come