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.

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 80P(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi39Mumbai30Bangalore26Cochin22Amritsar18Pune16Ahmedabad16Jaipur12Visakhapatnam11Indore9Surat9Chandigarh9Chennai6Varanasi6Rajkot6Lucknow5Nagpur4Kolkata3Jodhpur2Telangana1Guwahati1Panaji1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 80P7Section 80P(2)(a)6Section 271(1)4Section 80P(2)(d)4Section 142(1)4Section 143(3)3Section 271(1)(c)3Section 40A(3)2Penalty

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)

Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961 is initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income to the tune of Rs.5,35,081/-. 7. Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Act. (i) During the year under consideration the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80P of the Act amounting

2
Deduction2

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)

80P of the Act will also apply to wrong claim under the head of depreciation. Making of wrong claim is not at par with concealment or giving of inaccurate information, which may call for levy of penalty under section 271( 1) ( c) of the Act.” 5.1.2. Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case

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)

4. For that no penalty for concealment is imposable on any statutory part disallowance of Appellants claim as in this case where Appellant’s 100% deduction claim U/S 80P(2)(a)(i) was allowed to the tune of 500%. Therefore such statutory disallowance cannot be a fit case for concealment and such penalty is liable to be quashed