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.

9 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 194Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai41Bangalore33Delhi26Nagpur16Hyderabad9Pune9Chandigarh9Jaipur7Kolkata6Ahmedabad6Visakhapatnam5Jabalpur5Chennai4Panaji3Raipur2Dehradun2Surat1Indore1Agra1Cuttack1Amritsar1Rajkot1

Key Topics

Section 14815Section 409Addition to Income8Section 271(1)(c)7TDS7Section 194A5Section 1474Penalty4Section 142(1)3Section 148A

MANOJ S. GUGALE,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1327/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1327/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Manoj S. Gugale 652, Shantisadan, Topkhana, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ahmednagar …. Pan: Adzpg9595N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 3, Ahmednagar

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ghei
Section 271(1)(c)Section 271B

u/s 271(1)(c) had erred in not appreciating the following important facts: a) The appellant had offered additional income, which constitutes a voluntary and bonafide act. b) In compliance of the disclosure, the appellant had filed the revised statement incorporating the additional income during the course of assessment proceedings also claimed the TDS voluntarily, which was remained

ANJALI PUSHKAR HINGANE,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, NASHIK

3
Section 1513
Disallowance3

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

ITA 2837/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2837/Pun/2017 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2012-13 Anjali Pushkar Hingane, Prop. M/S Areen Petroleum Services, Saikheda Phata, At Post Chandori, Taluka- Niphad, Dist. Nashik. अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan : Abiph8603F …. Vs. Ito, Ward- 1(3), …. ""यथ"/ Respondent Nashik.

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawli
Section 194A

194A on the payment of interest to the Co-operative Credit Societies. Since, the assessee failed to comply with the TDS provisions, disallowance was made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee has now raised an additional ground seeking benefit of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f

RENISHAW METROLOGY SYSTEMS LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 619/PUN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.619/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Renishaw Metrology Systems The Dy.Commissioner Limited, V Of Income Tax, Circle- S.No.283, Hissa No.2, S.No.284, S 5, Pune. Hissa No.2 & 3A, Raisoni Estate, Taluk – Mulshi, Dist-Pune. Pan: Aabcr6361F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Ajit Jain & Shri Siddesh Chaugule – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Suhas Kulkarni – Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/01/2024

Section 194ASection 271Section 92C(2)Section 92C(3)Section 92D

penalty proceedings under Section 271(l)(c) of the Act on the premise that the Appellant has concealed/ furnished inaccurate particulars of income, without appreciating the fact that adjustment made is not in accordance with the law.” Findings & Analaysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) for the assessee at the outset

CHANDRAKANT VITHTHAL BHOPI,RAIGAD vs. ITO WARD 1 , PANVEL

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

ITA 2405/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 Chandrakant Viththal Bhopi Ito, Ward-1, Panvel At Chinchpada, Post Panvel, Tal. Vs. Panvel, Dist. Raigad – 410206 Pan: Bjdpb7610L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak & Ajinkya M Vaishampayan Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 05-05-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-05-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak &For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 2(14)Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are initiated separately for concealment of income.‖ 7. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the action of the Assessing Officer. 8. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 9. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that

VINEET TIWARI,BANGALORE vs. CIRCLE 12, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3169/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Santanu Kumar Sarangi (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 192Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.20,58,288/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). For the sake of convenience, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual

VINEET TIWARI,BENGALURU vs. CIRCLE 12, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3168/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Santanu Kumar Sarangi (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 192Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs.20,58,288/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). For the sake of convenience, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual

RBL BANK LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

ITA 650/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.650/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 194Section 194ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

194A on the payment of interest to the Co-operative Credit Societies. Since, the assessee failed to comply with the TDS provisions, disallowance was made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee has now raised an additional ground seeking benefit of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f

THE RATNAKAR BANK LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 502/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 194ASection 40

194A on the payment of interest to the Co-operative Credit A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 Societies. Since, the assessee failed to comply with the TDS provisions, disallowance was made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee has now raised an additional ground seeking benefit of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted by the Finance

THE RATNAKAR BANK LTD.,,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 501/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 194ASection 40

194A on the payment of interest to the Co-operative Credit A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 Societies. Since, the assessee failed to comply with the TDS provisions, disallowance was made u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee has now raised an additional ground seeking benefit of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted by the Finance