Search: penalty u/s 271

2 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 276Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi59 Mumbai50 Pune15 Kolkata9 Ahmedabad8 Jaipur7 Lucknow7 Chennai6 Patna6 Agra4 Karnataka3 Indore2 Rajkot2 Ranchi2 SC2 Chandigarh2 Jodhpur1 Telangana1 Hyderabad1 Panaji1 Bangalore1 Amritsar1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)9 Section 2715 Capital Gains2 Penalty2

SMT. BIJAL DARSHITBHAI PUJARA,,RAJKOT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1),, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 292/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot16 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Samir Bhuptani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 139Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(l}(c) had been held justified on the disclosure by assessee after detection by department. In view of the above discussed facts and 'circumstances of the case and the binding decision of Hon. Gujarat High Court the impugned penalty is confirmed. The grounds of appeal is rejected. 7. For statistical purpose, the appeal of the assessee

SMT. BIJAL DARSHITBHAI PUJARA,,RAJKOT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1),, RAJKOT

SMT. BIJAL DARSHITBHAI PUJARA,,RAJKOT vs. THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1),, RAJKOT

SHRI AJAYBHAI ISHWARLAL GOGIA,,RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 (2) (5), RAJKOT