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.

4 results for “section 68”+ Section 273Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai35Ahmedabad26Delhi23Karnataka21Surat16Jaipur13Hyderabad11Bangalore11Chennai11Visakhapatnam9Kolkata9Chandigarh7Cochin7Nagpur7Rajkot6Pune4Jabalpur3Cuttack3Allahabad1Varanasi1Indore1

Key Topics

Section 269S16Section 271D8Section 271B5Section 271E4Section 27I4Penalty4Section 1323Section 44A3Section 2713Search & Seizure

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 272A
2
Section 272B

273B. Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of 24[clause (b) of sub-section (1) of| 25 f section 271. Section 271A, 26 [section 271AA,] section 271B 26a[, section 271 BA], 27 [section 27IBB.]section 271C , section 27ID, section 271E , 28 [ section 271F. 29 1 section

DR. SANJIV KESHAV KARANDE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1540/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1540/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dr. Sanjiv Keshav Karande, H. No.158, Samata Nagar, Deepmala, A/P Daund, Dist. Pune-413801. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Asrpk5180G बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-11(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri M. R. Bhagwat Revenue By : Shri Sanghamitra Khobragaae सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2020 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.02.2020 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Pune Dated 27.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Jt.Cit Levied The Penalty U/S 271D Of The Act. The Cit(A) Confirmed The Same. 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That This Is A Case Where The Penalty Order Dated 29.11.2016 Is Time Barred. Referring To The Provisions Of Clause (C) Of Section 275(1) Of The Act, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Submitted That The Penalty Order Passed On 29.11.2016 Is A Time Barred One. Otherwise, On Merits Of Levy Of Penalty, Ld.

For Appellant: Shri M. R. BhagwatFor Respondent: Shri Sanghamitra Khobragaae
Section 269SSection 271BSection 271DSection 273BSection 275(1)Section 44A

273B. But the assessee would have to prove both things a. Loans were genuine. b. There was urgency or compulsion for contravention of provisions of section 269SS. However, the assessee has failed on both the counts. He has not been able to prove the genuineness of the loans nor the urgency or compulsion for contravention of provision of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, RATNAGIRI vs. JAGRUT MOTORS, RATNAGIRI

Appeal of the Revenue is DISMISSED

ITA 282/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Ratnagiri . . . . . . . . Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S Jagrut Motors, D-25, Midc, Mirjole, Ratnagiri– 415 639 Pan : Aadfj1431D . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/05/2024 Order Per G.D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Revenue Anent To Assessment Year 2012-13 [For Short ‘Ay’] Is Assailed Against The First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Cit(A) /Nfac’] Dt. 19/12/2023 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Order Of Penalty Dt. 14/03/2019 Passed U/S 271E By The Jcit Ratnagiri Range, Ratnagiri [For Short ‘Ao’]

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 250Section 269SSection 269TSection 271ESection 273B

68,90,000/- in cash to its sister concern against the repayment of loans/advance ₹75,34,545/- taken by it in discharging its Maharashtra Value Added Tax [in short ‘MVAT’] Liability which was paid by its sister concern. 3.3 On a reference from the assessing officer, the Ld. AO initiated the penalty proceedings by issue of show cause notice

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD., AURANGABAD. vs. TAPADIYA CONSTRUCTION LTD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1375/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk, Addl.CIT
Section 132Section 269SSection 271D

273B, the Assessee had reasonable cause for accepting the cash from its customers. 8.2 Pertinently, the A.O. has not disputed any of the above basic facts. 8.3 The AO levied the penalty u/s. 271D by principally relying on the amendment made in section 194 IA vide the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019, wherein in the definition of the term