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.

22 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 2(24)(iia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Raipur30Mumbai22Ahmedabad15Delhi11Pune6Guwahati5Jaipur4Bangalore3Kolkata2Indore2

Key Topics

Section 14A27Penalty19Section 271(1)(c)18Deduction17Addition to Income15Section 8012Disallowance9Section 36(1)(va)7Section 115J

CREDIT GUARANTEE FUND TRUST FOR MICRO AND SMALL ENTERPRISES ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT EXEMPTION-1(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 179/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarcredit Guarantee Fund Vs. Dcit(E) – 1(1) Trust Mumbai. 1St Floor, Sidbi Swavalaman Bhavan, Avenue – 3, Lane 2, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra (E) Pan/Gir No. Aaatc2613D (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(iia)Section 250

24) (iia) of the Act and has assessed the total income at Rs.93,73,75,000/-. However, the Ld. AO, has erred in not allowing deduction of 15% of the said income derived under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. In this regard, it is submitted that the trust was notified u/s. 10(23EB) of the Income

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 2(24)(x)6
Section 254(1)6
Section 37(1)6

ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMLERY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6236/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

ASST CIT CC 38, MUMBAI vs. UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3534/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

THE ACIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. M/S. UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1822/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 6224/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

M/S. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD(NOW KNOWN AS UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CEN CIR-38, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1787/MUM/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2002-2003

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c)) ACIT, CC-38, Room no. M/s. United Phosphorous Ltd. 32(1), Ayakar Bhavan, Vs. Uniphos House, Madhu Park, 11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai. Maharishi Karve Rd., Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACU 3440 P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Vasanti Patel Advocate Revenue by Shri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement

UNIPHOS ENTERPRISES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CEN RG IX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 3878/MUM/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2003-04
Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 80

penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c))\nACIT, CC-38, Room no.\nVs.\nM/s. United Phosphorous Ltd.\n32(1), Ayakar Bhavan,\nUniphos House, Madhu Park,\nMaharishi Karve Rd.,\n11th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai.\nMumbai-400020.\nPAN: AAACU 3440 P\n(Appellant)\n(Respondent)\nAssessee by\nMs. Vasanti Patel Advocate\nRevenue by\nShri. Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR\nDate of Hearing\n18/03/2025\nDate

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMELRY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 5344/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2007-08
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

271(1)(c) of the Act.\n2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner\nof Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assistant\nCommissioner of Income-tax in levying penalty in respect of excess deduction\nclaimed under section 80HHC due to adjustment made on account of reducing

DCIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDL.L TD), MUMBAI

ITA 6709/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2005-06
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

271(1)(c) of the Act.\n\n2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner\nof Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assistant\nCommissioner of Income-tax in levying penalty in respect of excess deduction\nclaimed under section 80HHC due to adjustment made on account of reducing

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1065/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) Revenue Ground No. Issues 1 to 4 Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act 5 Disallowance u/s 40(a)9ia) on year end provisions 6 Deleting the addition on account of CENVAT Credit ignoring the fact that the addition was made on net-basis and assessee, itself, withdrew its ground before ITAT

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1248/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) Revenue Ground No. Issues 1 to 4 Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act 5 Disallowance u/s 40(a)9ia) on year end provisions 6 Deleting the addition on account of CENVAT Credit ignoring the fact that the addition was made on net-basis and assessee, itself, withdrew its ground before ITAT

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 7027/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

271(1)(c) of the Act.\n\n2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner\nof Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assistant\nCommissioner of Income-tax in levying penalty in respect of excess deduction\nclaimed under section 80HHC due to adjustment made on account of reducing

DCIT CC-38, MUMBAI vs. UNITED PHOPHOURUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNWON AS SEARCH CHEM INDL. LTD), MUMBAI

ITA 6807/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

271(1)(c) of the Act.\n2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner\nof Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assistant\nCommissioner of Income-tax in levying penalty in respect of excess deduction\nclaimed under section 80HHC due to adjustment made on account of reducing

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS SEARCH CHEM INDUSTRIES LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 7028/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

271(1)(c) of the Act.\n\n2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner\nof Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assistant\nCommissioner of Income-tax in levying penalty in respect of excess deduction\nclaimed under section 80HHC due to adjustment made on account of reducing

UNITED PHOSPHORUS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 38, MUMBAI

ITA 6950/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate and Ms. Saisudha Multani, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Tharwal, Sr. DR
Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

iia) (iiib) or (iiic) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the plea of the assessee and held that DEPB income arises out of the scheme of the Government and not out of the business of the assessee. the assessee in its additional grounds of appeal also raised the plea that deduction under section 80HHC ought to be granted

STRIDES ARCOLAB LTD,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1903/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 10BSection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 35Section 92C

penalty proceedings under Section 274 read with Section 271(l)(c) of the Act The Appellant craves leave to add, alter and modify the above grounds during the course of the appeal. For the above and any other grounds which may be raised at the time of hearing, it is prayed that necessary relief may be provided.‖ 5.1 The assessee

DCIT CIR 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AIRMID DEVELOPERS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7081/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

271(1)(c) of the Act. Ground No. 8: The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. Further, the Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal and submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the hearing of this appeal

DCIT CIR 3(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AIRMID DEVELOPERS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 949/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

271(1)(c) of the Act. Ground No. 8: The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. Further, the Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal and submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the hearing of this appeal

AIRMID DEVELOPERS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6758/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

271(1)(c) of the Act. Ground No. 8: The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. Further, the Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal and submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the hearing of this appeal

AIRMID DEVELOPERS LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1011/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 92C

271(1)(c) of the Act. Ground No. 8: The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. Further, the Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal and submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the hearing of this appeal