Search: penalty u/s 271

3 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 273Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 142(1)6 Section 271B5 Section 271(1)(b)4 Section 271D4 Section 143(3)3 Section 1473 Penalty3 Section 1422 Section 1482

RISHIKESH PANDEY, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 382/RPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.382/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Rishikesh Pandey 2Nd Floor, Ekatma Parisar, G.E. Road, Bjp Complex, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Ahgpp2793N ........अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B. Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(b)

u/s. 271(1)(b) of the Act”. This shows a gross negligence on the part of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in appreciating the facts in the case and appropriate application of mind. That penalty 5 Rishikesh Pandey Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur imposable for violation of Section 271 of the Act is not mandatory and if such failure

RISHIKESH PANDEY, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

RISHIKESH PANDEY, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

M/S RADHE SHYAM BENI SHYAM KESARY & COMPANY,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICDRF, WARDF 1(2), BILASPUR

M/S VIJENDRA SINGH & ASSOCIATES,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BILASPUR