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.

17 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 132clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,223Mumbai1,032Jaipur353Indore265Kolkata229Ahmedabad217Bangalore190Hyderabad182Surat176Pune175Chennai155Karnataka111Raipur109Chandigarh102Lucknow71Rajkot63Visakhapatnam60Allahabad43Amritsar41Cochin40Nagpur37Calcutta35Guwahati34Cuttack28Ranchi27Agra26Patna22Dehradun19Panaji17Jabalpur11SC7Jodhpur6Rajasthan2Telangana2Varanasi1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 24940Section 14430Section 43B21Section 246A20Penalty14Section 253(1)10Section 25010Section 271(1)(c)10Limitation/Time-bar

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 261/PAN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

10
Condonation of Delay10
Section 143(3)8
Addition to Income7

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 262/PAN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 260/PAN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 263/PAN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 264/PAN/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 268/PAN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 267/PAN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 266/PAN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 259/PAN/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 265/PAN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

132 of the Act on Mr Prasanna Ghotage (the spouse of the present appellant assessee) certain incriminating material of the assessee were found and seized. The consequential proceedings were initiated u/s 153 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee neither filed any return nor responded the notices. The non- co-operation lead to framing of assessment to the ITAT

KAMAT CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result the three appeals ITA

ITA 140/PAN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gd Padmahshalii T A. No.137,138,139&140/Pan/2023 (A.Y. 2007-08, 2009-10,2010-11&2011-12) Kamat Construction Pvt The Assistant Ltd., F/2, Indira Vs. Commissioner Of Apartments, Income Tax, Circle Caetanoalburquerque 1(1),Panaji, Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan.No. Aaack8135H (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 27Section 271(1)Section 271A

132 of the I.T Act was carried out on 31-01-2012 on the assessee and notice u/s 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued. Further, notice u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued for the impugned Kamat Construction Pvt. Ltd. assessment year and the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared from time

KAMAT CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result the three appeals ITA

ITA 137/PAN/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Apr 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gd Padmahshalii T A. No.137,138,139&140/Pan/2023 (A.Y. 2007-08, 2009-10,2010-11&2011-12) Kamat Construction Pvt The Assistant Ltd., F/2, Indira Vs. Commissioner Of Apartments, Income Tax, Circle Caetanoalburquerque 1(1),Panaji, Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan.No. Aaack8135H (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 27Section 271(1)Section 271A

132 of the I.T Act was carried out on 31-01-2012 on the assessee and notice u/s 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued. Further, notice u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued for the impugned Kamat Construction Pvt. Ltd. assessment year and the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared from time

KAMAT CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1(1), PANAJI

In the result the three appeals ITA

ITA 139/PAN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gd Padmahshalii T A. No.137,138,139&140/Pan/2023 (A.Y. 2007-08, 2009-10,2010-11&2011-12) Kamat Construction Pvt The Assistant Ltd., F/2, Indira Vs. Commissioner Of Apartments, Income Tax, Circle Caetanoalburquerque 1(1),Panaji, Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan.No. Aaack8135H (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 27Section 271(1)Section 271A

132 of the I.T Act was carried out on 31-01-2012 on the assessee and notice u/s 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued. Further, notice u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued for the impugned Kamat Construction Pvt. Ltd. assessment year and the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared from time

KAMAT CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

In the result the three appeals ITA

ITA 138/PAN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Apr 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gd Padmahshalii T A. No.137,138,139&140/Pan/2023 (A.Y. 2007-08, 2009-10,2010-11&2011-12) Kamat Construction Pvt The Assistant Ltd., F/2, Indira Vs. Commissioner Of Apartments, Income Tax, Circle Caetanoalburquerque 1(1),Panaji, Road, Panaji, Goa-403001. Goa-403001. Pan.No. Aaack8135H (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 27Section 271(1)Section 271A

132 of the I.T Act was carried out on 31-01-2012 on the assessee and notice u/s 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued. Further, notice u/s 142(1) and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued for the impugned Kamat Construction Pvt. Ltd. assessment year and the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared from time

M/S SALITHO ORES PRIVATE LIMITED,PANAJI vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - M1, MARGAO

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 72/PAN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1, Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Margao Panaji, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8859 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ, DR
Section 43B

u/s. 43B of the Act amounting to Rs.5,85,17,297/- cannot be sustained and hence, is deleted. Ground No.2 is allowed.” 4. The Department in this ground substantially had contended that there has been a violation of Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 by the ld. CIT(A) in admission of additional evidences produced

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SALITHO ORES PVT. LTD, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 100/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1, Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Margao Panaji, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8859 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ, DR
Section 43B

u/s. 43B of the Act amounting to Rs.5,85,17,297/- cannot be sustained and hence, is deleted. Ground No.2 is allowed.” 4. The Department in this ground substantially had contended that there has been a violation of Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 by the ld. CIT(A) in admission of additional evidences produced

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI vs. M/S SALITHO ORES PVT. LTD, PANAJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 99/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury(Through Virtual Hearing) M/S. Salitho Ores Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Circle-1, Salgaocar Bhavan, Altinho, Margao Panaji, Goa. Pan: Aabcs 8859 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Anand DJ, DR
Section 43B

u/s. 43B of the Act amounting to Rs.5,85,17,297/- cannot be sustained and hence, is deleted. Ground No.2 is allowed.” 4. The Department in this ground substantially had contended that there has been a violation of Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 by the ld. CIT(A) in admission of additional evidences produced