BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

267 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 139(4)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi310Mumbai267Jaipur198Chennai129Bangalore128Indore108Hyderabad106Ahmedabad105Pune65Surat51Chandigarh47Raipur46Amritsar39Rajkot39Kolkata36Allahabad27Patna23Lucknow23Cochin21Nagpur21Visakhapatnam19Guwahati18Cuttack11Dehradun10Panaji10Ranchi6Jodhpur5Agra3Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)119Section 143(3)101Addition to Income75Section 153A65Section 14747Penalty47Section 14A40Section 153C38Section 250

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1054/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

4 percentile of ‘salary and wages salary and wages’ expenses and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 267 · Page 1 of 14

...
35
Disallowance31
Section 14828
Reopening of Assessment14

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1051/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

4 percentile of ‘salary and wages salary and wages’ expenses and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DICT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1052/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

4 percentile of ‘salary and wages salary and wages’ expenses and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014

ITA 1053/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 37(1)

4 percentile of ‘salary and wages salary and wages’ expenses and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing basis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing

ILA JITENDRA MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5219/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Ganatra, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 133Section 139(1)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 54F

4 Ms. Ila Jitendra Mehta and therefore initiated separately, the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for concealment of income. 8. The AO thereafter issued a penalty notice dated 31.12.2016 u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s 274 of the Act for the limb of furnishing of particulars of income. 9. Thereafter the AO vide show cause notice

ACIT-3(4), MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2898/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Reliance Industries Ltd., Dy. Cit Circle 3(4), 3Rd Floor, Maker Chamber Iv 222 Room No. 559, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacr 5055 K Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Acit-3(4), Reliance Industries Ltd., Room No. 481(2), 4Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Maker Chamber Iv Aayakar Bhavan, N.M. Road, Vs. Nariman Point, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacr 5055 K Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 32A

139/- ignoring the facts that the penalty was levied by the AO on the transfer pricing adjustment confirmed during the appellate stage and penalty u/S 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable as per I.T. Act, 1961. 2.1 The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are reproduced as under: On the facts and in the circumstances

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CIRCLE 3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed whereas\nthe appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2767/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Mr. Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Ms. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 32A

139/- ignoring the facts that the penalty was levied by\nthe AO on the transfer pricing adjustment confirmed during the\nappellate stage and penalty u/S 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable as per\nI.T. Act, 1961.\n2.1 The grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal are\nreproduced as under:\nOn the facts and in the circumstances

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014-15 to AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed

ITA 1049/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

4 percentile of ‘salary and wages'\nexpenses and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate\nbasis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing\ninaccurate particulars of the income.\n4.3 Further, the Assessing Officer also observed that assessee\nused 'shell entities' for rotation of funds/circuitous transactions.\nThe Assessing Officer identified expenses related to the shell entities

SWARAN NADHAN SALARIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), MUMBAI

In the result all appeals of the assesses from AY 2014-15 to AY\n2020-21 are partly allowed

ITA 1050/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

4 percentile of ‘salary and wages'\nexpenses and 10 percentile of administrative expenses on estimate\nbasis and initiated penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act for furnishing\ninaccurate particulars of the income.\n4.3 Further, the Assessing Officer also observed that assessee\nused 'shell entities' for rotation of funds/circuitous transactions.\nThe Assessing Officer identified expenses related to the shell entities

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 536/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 468/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 466/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI ,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 535/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 467/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5 (2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 470/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

PRIYAA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 469/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

u/s 271(1)(c)\neven in respect of undisclosed income detected as a result of the search.\ng. Sub-section 2 which has the effect of resembling the application of section\n271(1)(c) makes it doubly sure that the provisions of section 271(1)(c) would not\napply in cases where a search had taken place and the income

M/S SANJEEV CHIRANIA HUF,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-28(3)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S Sanjeev Chirania Huf, Ito-28(3)(1), 301, Sona Chambers, 507/509 Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Vs. Jss Road, Chira Bazar, Station Commercial Marine Lines – East, Complex, Vashi, Mumbai-400 002. Navi Mumbai-400703 Pan No. Aarhs 4527 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Ritu Kamalkishor, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Milind S. Chavan, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 23/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/03/2023 Order

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamalkishor, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Milind S. Chavan, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 271F

139 or by the provisos to that sub or by the provisos to that sub-section, fails to furnish section, fails to furnish such return before the end of the relevant assessment such return before the end of the relevant assessment such return before the end of the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer may direct that such year

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 437/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

4\nITA No. 435 to 439/Mum/2025\nΑ.Υ. 2010-11, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14 & 16-17\nMohan Thakurdas Gurnani\n(a) The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the levy of penalty u/s.271(1)(c), for concealment of income, by ld. AO of Rs.46,527/- being 100% of the tax on notional income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. TRIUMPH SECURITIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 962/MUM/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2025AY 2003-04
For Appellant: \nShri Rajiv Khandelwal (VirtuallyFor Respondent: \nDr. P. Daniel – Spl. Counsel
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

139(1) or by such notice.\ndated\n*have without reasonable cause failed to comply with a notice under Section 22(4)/23(2)\nof the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 or under Section 142(1)/143(2) of the Income-tax Act,\n1961, No.\nor have without reasonable cause\nfailed to comply with a notice under Section 22(4

THE DCIT-1(3)(1) MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S FERN INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1402/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 139Section 143Section 154Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

4. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before Ld.CIT(A) assessee filed the detailed submissions: 3 ITA.NO.1402/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2012-13) M/s Fern Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., "7. Rectification of claim of depreciation a. Appellant states that it has made a genuine and bonafide address in the return filed by appellant u/s 139 of the Act which