Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 50Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai61 Delhi55 Ahmedabad26 Jaipur20 Surat10 Lucknow10 Agra9 Dehradun7 Hyderabad6 Indore6 Chennai6 Visakhapatnam6 Bangalore6 Pune4 Chandigarh4 Kolkata3 Nagpur3 Rajkot3 Jodhpur2 Allahabad2 Jabalpur1 Raipur1 Patna1

Key Topics

Section 43C6 Section 271(1)(c)5 Section 50C3 Section 56(2)(vii)3 Addition to Income3 Section 234A2 Section 1482 Section 562 Penalty2

SMT. RADHADEVI MADHUSUDAN JAJODIA,THANE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 84/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DambleFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Singhai

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 43C

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is unjustified and unwarranted.” 3. Facts in brief:– The assessee is an individual and is engaged in the business of plot development. The assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 29/11/2014, declaring total income at ` 35,60,840. The case was picked up for scrutiny through CASS

SMT. RADHADEVI MADHUSUDAN JAJODIA,THANE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

SMT. RADHADEVI MADHUSUDAN JAJODIA,THANE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

MRS. DEVYANI AJIT MULIK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCEL-1, NAGPUR

BHAVESH SURESH SEJPAL,AKOT vs. ITO WARD-3, AKOLA