Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 44Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai20 Bangalore8 Hyderabad5 Delhi4 Kolkata3 Chennai3 Patna2 Jaipur2 Jodhpur1 Cochin1 Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 2746 Penalty3 Section 2502 Section 271B2 Section 44B2 Section 271(1)(c)2 Natural Justice2

PRADIP BARDHAN vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA,

In the result, ITA No. 1307/Kol/2016, dismissed & ITA No

ITA 1308/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

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

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 274Section 44B

Section 44B of the Act, as the turnover of the assessee exceeded Rs.40 Lakhs. 2.2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, relied on the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Brij Lal Goyal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2004] 88 ITD 413 (Delhi), and submitted that he was under the impression that the partnership firm

PRADIP BARDHAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, ITA No. 1307/Kol/2016, dismissed & ITA No

PRADIP BARDHAN vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA,

PRADIP BARDHAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PRADIP BARDHAN vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA,

PRADIP BARDHAN,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

JCIT, (OSD), CIR-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S WEST BENGAL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., KOLKATA