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.

24 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 55Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai24Pune7Ahmedabad2Kolkata2Lucknow2Surat1Delhi1Bangalore1Jaipur1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)20Penalty20Section 1546Section 14Section 143(1)3Section 143(2)3Section 56(2)(vii)3Section 43C3Section 693

MR. HIRJIPARBAT GADA,MUMBAI vs. ITO- CIRCLE 24(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 528/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar- A.Y. 2014-15 - A.Y. 2014-15 - A.Y. 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi a/w Shri Prashant GhumareFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2Section 250Section 43CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 6Section 69

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

House Property3
Unexplained Investment3
Addition to Income3

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately for filing inaccurate particulars and concealment of income.” 5. After getting the rectification order, the demand U/s 143(3) of the Act was reduced, but the said order was duly challenged before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) took an observation that the issue is already settled

MR. HIRJIPARBAT GADA,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD 24(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 527/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar- A.Y. 2014-15 - A.Y. 2014-15 - A.Y. 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi a/w Shri Prashant GhumareFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, SR DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2Section 250Section 43CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 6Section 69

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately for filing inaccurate particulars and concealment of income.” 5. After getting the rectification order, the demand U/s 143(3) of the Act was reduced, but the said order was duly challenged before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) took an observation that the issue is already settled

SCHWAB FUNDAMENTAL EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETY ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-4(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2133/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Pranay Gandhi; Shri Lekh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar
Section 111ASection 115ASection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 270ASection 70Section 70(2)

55A of the Act whilst sections 111A and 115AD only provide for determination of tax in certain cases and therefore, gains arising on transactions subjected to STT and those not subjected to STT are no different and satisfy the 'similar computation' condition specified in section 70(2) of the Act. 3. The learned DCIT failed to appreciate that section

MR. HIRJIPARBAT GADA,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD 24(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 526/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 43CSection 56(2)(vii)Section 6Section 69

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is being initiated separately for\nfiling inaccurate particulars and concealment of income.\nITA No.526/Mum/2024\n5. After getting the rectification order, the demand U/s 143(3) of the Act was\nreduced, but the said order was duly challenged before the Ld.CIT(A) and the\nLd.CIT(A) took an observation that the issue is already settled

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2867/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

u/s. 36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions

ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3785/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

u/s. 36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5033/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

u/s. 36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4313/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Advocate and Shri Ninad Patade, CAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT DR
Section 1

u/s. 36(1)(viii). 15. This issue arises in the following appeals: Assessment year Ground No. in Ground No. in Assessee's appeal Revenue's appeal 2004-05 - 2 2006-07 - 3 2007-08 - 3 15.1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve No. 1 towards “provisions

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2866/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2005-06

section, Assessing Officer has no power to bifurcate on \npro-rata basis and deduct a part of it from the gross dividend income. \nThere is no scope for any estimation of expenditure and hence no scope \n54 \nHDFC Bank Ltd. \nITA No.4315/MUM/2007 and Ors. \nAYs 2002-03 to 2020-21 \nfor allocation of notional expenditure. The deductions contemplated are \nthe

ACIT-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., DELHI

ITA 2049/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Section 57(iii) and find that ld.\nUnder the said section, Assessing Officer has no power to bifurcate on\npro-rata basis and deduct a part of it from the gross dividend income.\nThere is no scope for any estimation of expenditure and hence no scope\n53\nHDFC Bank Ltd.\nITA No.4315/MUM/2007 and Ors.\nAYs

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5442/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2007-08

u/s.\n36(1)(viii).\n15. This issue arises in the following appeals:\n Assessment year\nGround No. in\nAssessee's appeal\nGround No. in\nRevenue's appeal\n2004-05\n-\n2\n2006-07\n-\n3\n2007-08\n-\n3\n15. 1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had\nwithdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores from Special Reserve

DCIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S HOUSING DEVELOPEMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided \nas per the table below: \n\nSr

ITA 4161/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2002-2003

271(1)(c) 2006-07 \n\n2. Except for appeals mentioned at Sr. Nos.24 and 39 to 42 in the \nabove table, all the appeals arise out of assessment orders passed u/s. \n143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for assessment years 2002-\n03 up to 2020-21. Since, similar issues are arising in several years, \nbefore

ACIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LTD ( MERGED ENTITY HDFC INVESTMENTS LIMITED ), MUMBAI

ITA 2980/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

section 54EC in respect of capital gains \narising on depreciable assets. \n\n17. This issue arises in the following appeals: \n\n Assessment year \nGround No. in \nAssessee's appeal \n\nGround No. in \nRevenue's appeal \n2006-07 \n- \n2 \n\n17. 1. Assessee had claimed deduction of Rs.54,49,21,366/- u/s.54EC \nin respect of short-term capital

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HDFC LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2665/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

section along with corresponding amendment \nu/s.41(1A) which are effective from Assessment Year 1998-99. \nAssessee had explained this aspect before the ld. Assessing Officer by \nclarifying that special reserve had been created over the years out of the \nprofits and “Special Reserve No. I Account” relates to amount which had \nbeen transferred up to financial year 1997-98. Thus

DCIT RANGE-1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 5110/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

271(1)(c) 2006-07 \n\n2. Except for appeals mentioned at Sr. Nos.24 and 39 to 42 in the \nabove table, all the appeals arise out of assessment orders passed u/s. \n143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for assessment years 2002- \n03 up to 2020-21. Since, similar issues are arising in several years, \nbefore

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided \nas per the table below: \n\n| Sr

ITA 2093/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

271(1)(c) | 2006-07 \n\n2. Except for appeals mentioned at Sr. Nos.24 and 39 to 42 in the \nabove table, all the appeals arise out of assessment orders passed u/s. \n143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for assessment years 2002- \n03 up to 2020-21. Since, similar issues are arising in several years, \nbefore

DCIT - 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORARTION LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of both, assessee and revenue are decided \nas per the table below: \n\nSr

ITA 2861/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

271(1)(c) 2006-07 \n\n2. Except for appeals mentioned at Sr. Nos.24 and 39 to 42 in the \nabove table, all the appeals arise out of assessment orders passed u/s. \n143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for assessment years 2002-\n03 up to 2020-21. Since, similar issues are arising in several years, \nbefore

HDFC BANK LIMITED (AS SUCCESSOR TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 1(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4314/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2003-04

Section 57(iii) and find that ld.\nUnder the said section, Assessing Officer has no power to bifurcate on\npro-rata basis and deduct a part of it from the gross dividend income.\nThere is no scope for any estimation of expenditure and hence no scope\n53\nHDFC Bank Ltd.\nITA No.4315/MUM/2007 and Ors.\nAYs

ACIT-1(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 2046/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

u/s. \n36(1)(viii). \n\n15. This issue arises in the following appeals: \n\n Assessment year \nGround No. in \nAssessee's appeal \nGround No. in \nRevenue's appeal \n2004-05 \n- \n2 \n2006-07 \n- \n3 \n2007-08 \n- \n3 \n\n15. 1. On this issue, ld. Assessing Officer noted that assessee had \nwithdrawn a sum of Rs.50 Crores

HDFC BANK LIMITED( AS SUCCESSOR TO HDFC LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT- 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2666/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri N

Section 57(iii) and find that ld.\nUnder the said section, Assessing Officer has no power to bifurcate on\npro-rata basis and deduct a part of it from the gross dividend income.\nThere is no scope for any estimation of expenditure and hence no scope\n\n53\nHDFC Bank Ltd.\nITA No.4315/MUM/2007 and Ors.\nAYs