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.

8 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 272A(1)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai120Surat100Indore97Delhi92Mumbai91Bangalore59Karnataka25Kolkata24Jaipur23Lucknow22Ahmedabad18Cuttack17Kerala14Hyderabad14Visakhapatnam8Pune8Allahabad7Rajkot7Amritsar6Panaji5Raipur5Jabalpur4Chandigarh3SC2Cochin2Nagpur2Patna1Guwahati1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 271D15Section 234E12Section 273B8Section 2016Section 2346Section 271B6Section 2716Section 272B6Penalty5TDS

ARCHANA PRASHANT DATE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 11(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2472/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2472/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A, sub- section (1) of section 272AA or section 272B or sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) of section 272BB or sub-section (1) of section 272BBB or clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section

4
Addition to Income2
Limitation/Time-bar2

UNIQUE AUTOMOBILES ,,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 477/PUN/2018[2004-05 ( F.Y. 03-04)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2022

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.477/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Unique Automobiles, The Cit(A), Kolhapur. 32, Jayraj, Near Tata Petrol Vs Pump, Vishrambag, Sangli – . 416416. Pan: Aaafu 3563 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri M.G.Jansnani - Dr Date Of Hearing 11/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2004-05 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur’S Order Dated 01.11.2017 Passed In Appeal No. Sli/093/10- 11, In Proceedings U/S.271B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 148Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 271CSection 271ESection 271FSection 271GSection 272ASection 272B

271 FA ,] 30[ section 271FB, ] 3.1 [ section 271G.1] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 272A. sub- section (1) of section 272AA1 or 32 [ section 272B or] 33 [sub- section (1) of section 272BB or] 34 [subsection (1) of section 272BBB or] clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause

KARDA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,,NASHIK vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 218/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.218/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Karda Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 8, Sai Krupa Complex, Behind Jayram Hospital, Near Mukhtidam Temple, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik Road, Nashik – 422101 …. Pan: Aadck1887B Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Range, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.219/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Naresh Karda 8, Sai Krupa Complex, Behind Jayram Hospital, Near Mukhtidam Temple, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik Road, Nashik – 422101 …. Pan: Abbpk8084A Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Range, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Aggarwal
Section 271Section 271D

271 D was valid in law. 2] The Id CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee company was issued first notice dt. 09.10.2013 which was dropped and subsequently a fresh notice was issued on 29.04.2014 and as per which, the penalty was levied and therefore, the order passed by the Id JCIT was valid in law and not barred

NARESH KARDA,,NASHIK vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed as indicated above

ITA 219/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.218/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Karda Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 8, Sai Krupa Complex, Behind Jayram Hospital, Near Mukhtidam Temple, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik Road, Nashik – 422101 …. Pan: Aadck1887B Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Range, Nashik आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.219/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Naresh Karda 8, Sai Krupa Complex, Behind Jayram Hospital, Near Mukhtidam Temple, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Nashik Road, Nashik – 422101 …. Pan: Abbpk8084A Vs. The Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Central Range, Nashik

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Aggarwal
Section 271Section 271D

271 D was valid in law. 2] The Id CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee company was issued first notice dt. 09.10.2013 which was dropped and subsequently a fresh notice was issued on 29.04.2014 and as per which, the penalty was levied and therefore, the order passed by the Id JCIT was valid in law and not barred

D.R.K. CONSTRUCTION,,SATARA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1151/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Aggarwal
Section 200(3)Section 271Section 271BSection 271CSection 271DSection 271ESection 271FSection 271GSection 271HSection 272A

271-I] clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) or sub- section (2) of section 272A, sub-section (1) of section 272AA] or [section 272B or] [sub-section (1) [or sub-section (1A)] of section 272BB or][sub-section(1) of section 272BBB or] clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) or clause

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 929/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

Section 201Section 234Section 234ESection 246ASection 250

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 931/PUN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

Section 201Section 234Section 234ESection 246ASection 250

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023

PADMAKAR VISHWAS DATE,,BHOSARI vs. INCOME TAX E ASSESSMENT, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 930/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.929, 930 & 931/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Padmakar Vishwas Date, The Income Tax Officer S.No.218, Near Shri Krishn V –Tds(2), Pune. Mandir, Alandi Road, S Bhosari, Pune – 411038. Pan: Anhpd3804B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sourabh Nayak – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/02/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16/02/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 All Dated 26.06.2023. Since Issue Involved Is Same, All These Appeals Were Heard Together & Decided By This Consolidated Order. We Treat Appeal In Ita No.929/Pun/2023 For A.Y.2013-14

Section 201Section 234Section 234ESection 246ASection 250

u/s 234 had been charged. 3. The Department of Income Tax, through its Officers send such letters and intimidate the Assessee, leading him to spend money on the proceedings besides causing mental anguish. The ITD may be directed to pay and amount of Rs.25,000/- to the Indian Army Welfare Fund as compensation for this frivolous action. ITA No.929/PUN/2023