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.

10 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 200clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi696Mumbai510Chennai145Jaipur139Ahmedabad139Bangalore134Karnataka125Pune85Kolkata83Raipur62Hyderabad61Indore51Surat49Chandigarh45Allahabad44Calcutta34Cochin28Cuttack24Lucknow24Amritsar20Dehradun17Nagpur17Visakhapatnam16Rajkot10Agra9Panaji8Guwahati7Patna6Jabalpur5Jodhpur3Telangana3Varanasi3Ranchi2SC1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)21Section 1487Section 80P7Penalty7Addition to Income5Section 143(3)4Section 234A4Undisclosed Income4Section 153A

SHRI BHAKTINAGAR CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO 3 (1) (1), RAJKOT

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee (ITA No

ITA 200/RJT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini. & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.200/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Shri Bhakti Nagar Co Operative Housing Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(1) Society Ltd. (Bhaktinagar Circle, Meghani Rang Bhavan, Aaykar Bhawan, Race Course Rajkot) Rong Road, A D Vyas & Co, Charted Accounts, Kotecha Rajkot - 360001 Nagar Main Road, Opp Kotecha Girl’S School, Off Kalawad Road. Rajkot - 360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaas2363M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriGautam Acharya, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(c)

u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act is ab initio void being bad in law. 3.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, learned CIT(A) forgot to appreciate the facts that the assessee has nothing concealed and therefore penalty for concealment should not be levied. 4.On the facts and in the circumstances

3
Cash Deposit3
Section 1542
TDS2

SHRI NIZARALI BAHADURBHAI HAJIYANI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-3, MORBI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 300/RJT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2012-13 to 2014-15. I.T.A Nos. 298 to 300/Rjt/2019 A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2014-15 Page No 2 Shri Nizarali Bahadurhai Hajiyani vs. ITO 2. These appeals are listed for hearing 9th time today and none appeared

SHRI NIZARALI BAHADURBHAI HAJIYANI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-3, MORBI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 299/RJT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2012-13 to 2014-15. I.T.A Nos. 298 to 300/Rjt/2019 A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2014-15 Page No 2 Shri Nizarali Bahadurhai Hajiyani vs. ITO 2. These appeals are listed for hearing 9th time today and none appeared

SHRI NIZARALI BAHADURBHAI HAJIYANI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-3, MORBI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 298/RJT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot13 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years (A.Ys) 2012-13 to 2014-15. I.T.A Nos. 298 to 300/Rjt/2019 A.Ys. 2012-13 to 2014-15 Page No 2 Shri Nizarali Bahadurhai Hajiyani vs. ITO 2. These appeals are listed for hearing 9th time today and none appeared

SHRI ANILKUMAR AMARNATH AGARWAL,,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 73/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Smt.Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumaramarnathagarwal Vs. Ito, Ward-1 27/2, Panchvatisociety Jamnagar. Nr.Gaushala Jamnagar 361 008. Gujarat. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Ld.Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) as under: "In this matter I have to submit that due to in advertence income credited by one debtor Shri Suresh Agarwal interest income worth Rs. 5,37,812.00 was not considered in audited accounts. It was also seen that claim of TDS was also not made in audited accounts. However, at the time of hearing

SHRI BHARATKUMAR IASHWARBHAI BHATIYA,RAJKOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRL-1,, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

ITA 44/RJT/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)

u/s 263 of the Act, and directed the assessing officer to verify the source of cash deposited in the bank accounts, which have been left out, during the course of original assessment proceedings. Accordingly, assessing officer made addition of peak credit in individual bank accounts. However, on further appeal by assessee, before

THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. SMT. MANISHABEN N. MASHRU,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 355/RJT/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavsr.No.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Ranpura, CAFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2005-06. Since in all these appeals/cross- objections, issues and facts are intertwined to each other, we proceed to dispose of all by this common order for the sake of brevity and convenience. 3. Before adverting

VRAJ AND VAJ CONSTRUCTION,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 179/RJT/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

200/- making disallowance u/s. 36(1)(va), disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) addition of short contract receipts and disallowance of depreciation on JCB machines. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings on the above disallowances and levied minimum penalty of Rs. 81,725/- being the tax sought to be evaded on concealed income. 3. Aggrieved against the same the assessee filed

SHRI RAHENDRASINH P. JADEJA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE DY. COMMR. INCOME TAX, CEN. CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 562/RJT/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Itano.562/Rjt/2014 िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Shri Rahendrasinh P. Jadeja, D.C.I.T, Pradhuman Villa, Vs. Central Circle-2, Opp. Neel Da Dhaba, Rajkot. Kalawad Road, Rajkot. Pan: Abopj5431H

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri JeetendraKumar, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 132BSection 140ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 234A

200/- and claim the seized cash of Rs. 30,00,000/- as advance tax on account of such undisclosed income. However, the AO in the Assessment Order dated 30/10/2009 framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, did not treat the seized cash as advance tax. Accordingly, the AO charged interest u/s 234A, 234B, and 234C

THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 , RAJKOT vs. SHRI SHAMJIBHAI SADHABHAI KANGAD, GANDHIDHAM-KUTCH

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue, in IT(SS) No

ITA 321/RJT/2022[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.11 To 20/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2011-12 To 2020-21 बनाम/ Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Deputy Commissioner Of Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Vs. Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Adepk 3471 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.21 To 23/Rjt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Years:2014-15, 2016-17 &2017-18 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Shri Shamjibhai Sadhabhai Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta Kangad Vs. Estate”, 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, Bbz-S-60, Zanda Chowk, Rajkot-360001 Gandhidham-370 201 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aabca 8202 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) आ.(खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.15/Rjt/2023 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year:2019-20 बनाम/ Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Hetab Shamjibhai Kangad Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Bbz-South-60, Zanda Chowk, Vs. “Amruta Estate”, 2Nd Floor, Gandhidham-370 201 M.G. Road, Rajkot-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.:Aqtpk 7484 M (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 153A

penalty or any harsh action under the Income tax Act or any other law shall be initiated by the Department or any other department on such voluntary offered ad-hoc estimated business income. The assessee submitted that source of cash and gold found / seized during the course of search has satisfactorily been explained and hence, there is no case