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 292clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai394Delhi288Bangalore145Kolkata127Karnataka110Jaipur99Ahmedabad51Pune42Lucknow36Raipur33Hyderabad32Indore30Chandigarh29Chennai28Ranchi26Surat23Allahabad20Amritsar19Cuttack17Kerala14Rajkot13Cochin7Agra6Nagpur3Telangana3Guwahati2Patna2Gauhati1Visakhapatnam1Panaji1Rajasthan1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)11Section 143(3)3Penalty2Addition to Income2

DCIT CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR vs. M/S TRISTER RETAIL CONCEPTS PRIVATE LIMITED, NAGPUR

In the result, department’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 319/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

292 ITR 11 (SC). The Hon'ble court has observed as follows: "Penalty under clause c of Sub-Section 1 of Section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, if the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) during the course of the Assessment Proceedings under the Act is satisfied that any person has 'concealed' or 'furnished inaccurate

ACIT ,CIRCLE (EXEMPTION ),NAGPUR , NAGPUR vs. M/S SIPNA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL ,AMRAVAI , AMRAVATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

ITA 223/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Acit, Vs. M/S. Sipnashikshan Prasarak Mandal Circle (Exemption), Badnera Road Amravati Amravati Pan No.:Aacts 1266 J Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shripiyushkolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shrihimeshdemble (Ca) Date Of Hearing: 26/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Department Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (A)-4, Nagpur Dated 27/03/2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y. 2013-14 Wherein The Department Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: ShriHimeshDemble (CA)For Respondent: ShriPiyushKolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

penalty u/s. 271(1)(C) being premature is not being adjudicated. 17. As a result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed.’’ 2.3 During the course of hearing, the ld. DR strongly relied on the order of the AO 2.4 On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the order

SHRI ANIL BAFNA,NAGPUR vs. THE ITO, WARD- 1(1),, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/NAG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 535/Nag/2014 ननिाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Anil Dalpatmal Bafna, Flat No.606, Rachana Yuthika Apartment, After Postal Colony, Amrawati Road, Nagpur-440033. Pan : Aespb0883J .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Anil BafnaFor Respondent: Dr. Milind Bhusari
Section 271(1)(c)

Section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and penalty is exigible to the facts of the case.” 3.1. The Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently submitted after stating that the penalty may be levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for ‘concealment of income’ in the assessment order, in the penalty order, the Assessing Officer has stated that