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.

2 results for “section 68”+ Section 271Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi58Jaipur57Mumbai41Hyderabad27Chennai26Karnataka21Ahmedabad19Kolkata14Pune13Indore12Visakhapatnam11Agra9Bangalore9Chandigarh8Surat7Rajkot5Cuttack3Jabalpur2Nagpur2Amritsar1Ranchi1SC1Lucknow1Varanasi1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 271D8Section 269S5Section 1483Penalty2Addition to Income2Limitation/Time-bar2

SHRI PRAKASH JIWANDAS WANJARI,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, we are of the considered view that the case on hand does not warrant levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Act

ITA 232/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 273ASection 80C

68 or 69 of the Act. 2.9 The AO in the original assessment accepted the contention of the appellant, the Addl./Joint CIT now has initiated and levied the penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 just to penalize the genuine and unintentional mistake of the appellant even though due to this transaction of the appellant there

SHRI BABURAO RAMBHAU KAPTE,CHANDRAPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDRAPUR RANGE, CHANDRAPUR

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

ITA 39/NAG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 269SSection 271Section 271DSection 274

68 days. The delay of days was due to bonafide belief, reasonable cause and not attributable to the Appellant. Therefore in the interest of justice, delay in filing the present Appeal, may kindly be condoned. No prejudice is going to be cause to the Revenue if delay is condoned and Appeal is decided on merits.” 4. On a perusal