Search: penalty u/s 271 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

6 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 234Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi475 Mumbai453 Ahmedabad199 Bangalore82 Pune53 Hyderabad43 Jaipur41 Kolkata38 Rajkot29 Allahabad23 Karnataka21 Indore21 Raipur20 Chandigarh12 Surat12 Amritsar11 Dehradun11 Lucknow10 Guwahati7 Patna6 Agra5 Chennai5 Jodhpur5 Nagpur3 Cuttack3 Visakhapatnam3 SC2 Jabalpur1 Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 2509 Section 1476 Section 1486 Section 1446 Penalty5 Section 271(1)(c)4 Section 234A4 Natural Justice4 Addition to Income4

SH. MHESHWAR SINGH,VAISHALI vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (3), VAISHALI

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 201/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty under section 271(1)(c) and section 271(1)(b) of the Act and also by sustaining levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C

Section 142(1)3

AMIT KUMAR VERMA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6(1), PATNA

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

ITA 357/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

234C of the act. 7. For that CIT (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). Delhi erred in confirming initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income tax Act, 1961 for concealment of income. 8. For that the order of the CIT (Appeal) and assessment order passed by the Id. Assessing officer is wrong, arbitrary and unjustified

SHARDINDU PRASAD SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), PATNA

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

ITA 630/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

penalty proceeding U/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and its confirmation by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by dismissing the appellant appeal in his order U/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This order is the subject matter of this 2nd appeal. B. APPELLANT SUBMISSION ON GROUNDS OF APPEAL Though numbers of grounds

OMJEE PRASAD,SARAN vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), CHAPRA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 182/PAT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna01 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sanjay Sarma]

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 44A

234C upon assessed tax is illegal and beyond the law. 8. For that any grounds which is applicable at the time of hearing to be urged. 9. For that any view of the matter, the impugned order is no sustainable in the eye of law as well as facts and fit to be set aside.” 2. From the perusal

VEENA MISHRA THROUGH NITISH MISHRA,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENT.CIR-1, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 152/PAT/2025[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

penalty proceedings under the provisions of section 271(1)(c) and 271(1)(b) of the Act in the fact and circumstances of this case and Ld. CIT Appeal erred in confirming the same. 14. For that the ld. Assessing officer has erred in charging interest under the provisions of section 234A, 234B and 234C of the income

JITENDRA KUMAR RAY,LALGANJ, HAJIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3) VAISHALI, HAJIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 344/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the Appeal. At the outset of hearing, we noted that the appeal filed by the assessee is delay by 256 days. In this regard, the assessee filed an affidavit dated 14.01.2026 stating the reasons for not filing appeal within the due date which is as under: “We enclose herewith an appeal u/s 253 of the I.T. Act 1961 against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to

For Respondent: Sh. Manab Adak, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 253Section 274Section 69

234C and 234D is unsustainable in law being mechanical and without the sanction of law. 8) For that the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 274 r.w.s 271(1) (c) & 271F of the I.T. Act, 1961 is arbitrary, unjustified, void, ab-initio and bad in laws. 9) For That the appellant craves leave to add/alter any/all grounds of appeal before