Search: penalty u/s 271

8 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 153C(1)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 14715 Section 1326 Search & Seizure5 Section 143(3)4 Section 292C4 Section 153C4 Section 143(2)3 Section 1513 Section 271(1)(c)

PRIME PRODUCTS LIMITED,KANPUR vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 2(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 514/LKW/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2013-14 M/S Prime Products Ltd., 87/8, Kalpi Vs. The Dy. Cit, Road, Kanpur Circle-2(1)(1), Kanpur Pan: Aaacp8239K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashish Jaiswal, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.01.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac In Confirming The Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Levied By The Ld. Assessing Officer On 23.01.2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That On The Facts & In Law, The Order Passed By Ld. Cit (Appeals), Nfac U/S 250 Of The Act Is Bad In Law. 2 That On The Facts & In Law, The Ld. Cit(Appeals), Nfac Has Erred In Upholding Action Of Learned Ao In Levying Penalty Of Rs. 94,000/- Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3 That On The Facts & In Law, The Notice Issued For Levy Of Penalty Under Section 274 R.W.S 271(1)(C) Dated 14/02/2020 Is Vague & Defective Since, It Does Not Specify The Limb Under Which Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Was Initiated. 4 That On The Facts & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac Has Erred In Not Appreciating That The Assessee Had Offered An Explanation. The Penalty Proceedings & The Consequent Order Are Invalid & Void Ab Initio As The Same Were Initiated & Levied Solely On The Basis Of An Affidavit Without Independent Evidence Of Concealment.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Jaiswal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR

Section 132

PRIME PRODUCTS LIMITED,KANPUR vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 2(1)(1), KANPUR

PRIME PRODUCTS LIMITED,KANPUR vs. D.C.I.T. CIRCLE 2(1)(1), KANPUR

M/S FIVE ROSES,KANPUR vs. DY, CIT-CC-1, KANPUR

M/S FIVE ROSES,KANPUR vs. J/DCIT-CC,, KANPUR

M/S FIVE ROSES,KANPUR vs. DY, CIT-CC-1, KANPUR

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. SHRI BHUPINDER SINGH TALWAR, LUCKNOW