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 271Eclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur40Mumbai26Delhi26Chennai21Karnataka21Ahmedabad16Hyderabad16Indore12Pune11Visakhapatnam10Kolkata9Agra8Surat7Bangalore6Chandigarh5Rajkot4Ranchi3Jabalpur2Cuttack2Nagpur2SC1Cochin1Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 271E5Section 271D5Section 1483Section 269T2Section 143(3)2Section 269S2Penalty2Addition to Income2

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

271E, section 271F, section 271FA, section 271FAB, section 271FB, section 271G, section 271GA, section 271GB, 5 Prakash Jiwandas Wanjari ITA no.232/Nag./2022 section 271H, section 271-1. section 271J, clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 2724, sub-section

SHRI SANJAY NANASAHEB BHARSAKALE,AMRAVATI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 142/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Moriyani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y.Marathe, Sr.Dr
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 269TSection 271ESection 68

Section 271E of the Act.” 4. We find that in the Assessment Order a sum of Rs.2,05,00,000/- was added u/s 68