BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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 “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 70clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai451Delhi409Jaipur127Raipur108Ahmedabad89Bangalore87Hyderabad84Chennai71Indore63Chandigarh59Kolkata43Rajkot41Pune29Allahabad29Surat24Amritsar15Nagpur15Cuttack14Visakhapatnam13Lucknow9Guwahati9Patna8Jodhpur6Ranchi4Panaji3SC3Dehradun2Agra1Jabalpur1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)14Penalty4Addition to Income4Section 2743Section 2713Section 153A3Disallowance3Section 322Section 271(1)2

M/S. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.,,RANCHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 212/RAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Central Coalfields Ltd., D.C.I.T., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, Circle-1, Vs. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue D.C.I.T., Central Coalfield Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Central Revenue Building Vs. Ranchi. Annexee, 5A, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 32

70,000/- @ 150% of the tax sought to be evaded under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 04/12/2017 on the ground that "the assessee company has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and to that extent it has concealed its income." 3. Aggrieved by the said penalty order, the assessee company filed appeal before

Depreciation2

DCIT,CIRCLE-1,RANCHI, RANCHI vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED, RANCHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 220/RAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi20 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Central Coalfields Ltd., D.C.I.T., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, Circle-1, Vs. Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue D.C.I.T., Central Coalfield Ltd., Circle-1, 4Th Floor, Central Revenue Building Vs. Ranchi. Annexee, 5A, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aaacc 7476 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent/ Assessee

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 32

70,000/- @ 150% of the tax sought to be evaded under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act dated 04/12/2017 on the ground that "the assessee company has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and to that extent it has concealed its income." 3. Aggrieved by the said penalty order, the assessee company filed appeal before

JOKHIRAM DURGADUTT,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 400/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayjokhiram Durgadutt, D.C.I.T., 9, J.D. Corporate, Behind J.D. High Circle-1, Vs. Street, Main Road, Ranchi-834001 Ranchi. (Jharkhand) Pan No. Aabfj 2200 Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

penalty of Rs. 21,12,388/- u/s 271(1)(c) and the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in upholding the same. 3. That the other and further grounds shall be urged at the time of hearing." 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessment in this case was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RANCHI, RANCHI vs. SHRI KAMAL BHUSHAN, RANCHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 36/RAN/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi07 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 139Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 271(1)(c) is not applicable to the case of assessee. LdAO has failedto ignore this vital point while imposing the penalty. As such, the penalty imposed by AO was illegal and rightly deleted by Ld CIT(A). 2. For that the notice issued U/s 274 rws 271(1)(c) was defective since the same did not specifically mention