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 142(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi1,346Mumbai1,078Jaipur347Indore325Ahmedabad318Kolkata241Surat232Pune207Hyderabad202Bangalore175Chennai157Chandigarh129Rajkot129Karnataka105Lucknow94Visakhapatnam84Raipur66Amritsar57Allahabad54Cuttack44Cochin41Nagpur37Calcutta36Patna35Guwahati35Agra33Jabalpur29Jodhpur24Dehradun18Panaji17Ranchi12SC6Varanasi4Telangana2Rajasthan2

Key Topics

Section 24940Section 14430Section 246A20Penalty16Section 271(1)(c)15Section 25011Section 143(3)10Section 253(1)10Limitation/Time-bar

DEVASHRI NIRMAN LLP ,PANAJI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PANAJI

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 272/PAN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji17 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Respondent: Shri Y. V. Raviraj
Section 271(1)(c)

142) i.e. Rs. 68,52,377/- & added to the income declared. 4. The said addition was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) and the ITAT. In connection with this addition, penalty was also levied. In the penalty order also the assessee’s claim 3 ITA No. 272/Pan./2017 was rejected that as per AS-7 offering profit under percentage completion

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 Panaji
10
Condonation of Delay10
Section 14A9
Addition to Income7
11 Feb 2026
AY 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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

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)

142(1) notice the appellant filed a return of her income on 30/03/2018. During the course of filing of former returns, it was well within the knowledge of the appellant that, assessment orders u/s 144 r.w.s. 153 of the Act and consequential penalty orders therefore u/s 271(1) of the Act were already passed and demands raised thereagainst were

M/S CHOWGULE AND COMPANY (SALT) PVT. LTD,MORMUGAO vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

ITA 390/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

For Appellant: Ms Hiral SejpalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 10(35)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4.2 The aforementioned order passed by the Ld. AO dislodging the claims of the assessee, was unsuccessfully challenged before the first appellate authority, and being aggrieved by the orders of tax ITAT-Panaji Page 6 of 23 M/s Chowgule and Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd ITA No.: 390/PAN/2017, AY : 2012-2013, AABCC5595J

GIOVANNI JOHN MANUEL VAZ,VASCO-DA-GAMA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, MARGAO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 392/PAN/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji02 Sept 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2001-02 Giovanni John Acit, Circle-1, Margao Manuel Vaz Vs. Karma Plaza, Vasco-Da- Gama, Goa - 403701 Pan: Acepv 5611 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-1, Panaji In Ita No.53/Mrg/2007-08 Dated 02.07.2018 Against The Order Passed By Ito, Ward-5, Margao U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For A.Y. 2001-02. 2. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee In The Present Appeal Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 142Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 5A

271(1)(c) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) for A.Y. 2001-02. 2. The grounds taken by the assessee in the present appeal are reproduced as under: “i. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the concealment penalty of Rs. 2,60,323/- without appreciating the facts of the case. ii. The appellant

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

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 to time and filed the submissions. And the assessment was completed vide order dated 31.01.2014 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s153A of the Act with the addition u/s

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

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 to time and filed the submissions. And the assessment was completed vide order dated 31.01.2014 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s153A of the Act with the addition u/s

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

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 to time and filed the submissions. And the assessment was completed vide order dated 31.01.2014 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s153A of the Act with the addition u/s

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

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 to time and filed the submissions. And the assessment was completed vide order dated 31.01.2014 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s153A of the Act with the addition u/s