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.

12 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 195(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi473Mumbai308Karnataka99Bangalore88Ahmedabad87Jaipur59Kolkata55Chandigarh43Calcutta34Pune31Raipur27Lucknow24Indore22Hyderabad20Chennai20Surat12Amritsar10Agra7Cochin7Cuttack7Dehradun7Allahabad3Nagpur2Telangana2Kerala1Rajasthan1Rajkot1Jabalpur1Panaji1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)24Section 27115Penalty12Section 195(6)10Addition to Income8Section 143(3)6Section 254(1)5Section 115J4Section 132(4)

SHRI PARESH K. SORATHIYA,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(2)(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 342/SRT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.342/Srt/2018 (Ay 2009-10) (Hearing In Physical Court) Shri Paresh Sorathiya Income Tax Officer 195, Ambica Nagar No.2, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Vs Opp. Arogya Kendra, Gate, Surat-395001 Katargam Road, Surat Pan : Axbps 9579 C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

195, Ambica Nagar No.2, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Vs Opp. Arogya Kendra, Gate, Surat-395001 Katargam Road, Surat PAN : AXBPS 9579 C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CA राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 07.07.2022 उ"घोषणा क" तार

AKSHAR GEMS,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.3(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

4
Section 1324
Disallowance4
Exemption2
ITA 24/SRT/2022[2016-17]Status: Disposed
ITAT Surat
30 Jan 2023
AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.24/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Virtual Court Hearing) Akshar Gems, Assistant Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Shreeji Diamond Apartment, Vs. Income-Tax, Circle-3(2), Nandu Doshi Ni Wadi, Vastadevdi Road, Aaykar Bhavan Nr.Majura Katargam, Surat – 395004 Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aarfa3697A Assessee By Shri Mehul Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/01/2023

Section 195Section 195(6)Section 271Section 274

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, as well as law on the subject, the Learned Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Surat erred in imposing the penalty to the tune of Rs.9,00,000/- u/s. 271 – I of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case

ACIT, CIRCLE-3(2), SURAT vs. M/S. VINAY DIAMONDS, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/SRT/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.103/Srt/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Court Hearing) Assistant Commissioner Of Income M/S Vinay Diamonds 201 To 205, 2Nd Floor, Avad Building, Tax, Circle-3(2), Surat, Room Vs. Opp. Mehta Petrol Pump, Katargam, No.410, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Surat-395004 Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aajfv 5089 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar– Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sapnesh R. Sheth, CA
Section 195(6)Section 271

u/s 195(6) r.w.Rule 37BB is not mandatory. The Form 15CA/15CB are required to be submitted only for those payments which are chargeable to tax in India and therefore later on the Government amended the provision of section 195(6) by issuing notification no.G.S.R. 978(E) dated 16tth December, 2015. It was further submitted that Section 195 of the Income

BAYER VAPI PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BILAG INDUSTRIES PVT.LTD.,),VAPI vs. THE A CIT., VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1688/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.1688/Ahd/2014 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06 Bayer Vapi Private Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Bilag Industries Income Tax, Private Limited), Plot No.306/3, Vapi Circle, Vapi. Phase-Ii, Vapi – 396 195, Gujarat. [Pan: Aabcb 2100 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate & Shri A. Gopalakrishnan, Ca Shri Prasenjit Singh – Cit(Dr) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 18.07.2019 सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 27.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per O.P.Meena, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The 1. Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)- Valsad, Valsad(In Short “The Cit(A)”) Dated 31.03.2014 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2005-06. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita 2. No.1688/Ahd/2014 Read As Under : “01. The Appellant Company Has Neither Concealed Its Income Nor Submitted Any Inaccurate Particulars Of Income & The Adjustments/ Additions Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Contrary To The Facts Of The Case & Law & Deserves To Be Deleted. 02. On Appreciation Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd.,(Formerly Known As Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vs.Acit-Vapi/Ita No.1688/Ahd/2014: A.Y.2005-06 Page 2 Of 20

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

195, Gujarat. [PAN: AABCB 2100 L] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate & Shri A. Gopalakrishnan, CA Shri Prasenjit Singh – CIT(DR) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by 18.07.2019 सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing: उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement on: 27.08.2019 आदेश /O R D E R PER O.P.MEENA

SHRIRANG SALES CORPORATION,SURT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1(2), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 147/SRT/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.147/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Physical Hearing) Shrirang Sales Corporation, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Plot 866, G.I. D.C. Sachin, Sachin Income-Tax, Circle - 1(2), Surat, Road No.85, Chorasi, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat– 394230 Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakfs8216Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Ketan Jagirdar, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/07/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2023

Section 143(3)Section 195Section 195(6)Section 271Section 271ISection 274

u/s 195(6) r.w.Rule 37BB is not mandatory. The Form 15CA/15CB are required to be submitted only for those payments which are chargeable to tax in India and therefore later on the Government amended the provision of section 195(6) by issuing notification no.G.S.R. 978(E) dated 16tth December, 2015. It was further submitted that Section 195 of the Income

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LTD, SURAT

In the result, all these three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 156/SRT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In all the appeals for the quantum assessment, the Revenue has raised certain common grounds of appeal. Facts in all the years are almost similar except variation in additions or disallowances, therefore, with the consent of parties

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), SURAT vs. J K PAPER LTD, SURAT

In the result, all these three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 157/SRT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In all the appeals for the quantum assessment, the Revenue has raised certain common grounds of appeal. Facts in all the years are almost similar except variation in additions or disallowances, therefore, with the consent of parties

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT, SURAT vs. M/S. J K PAPER LIMITED, SURAT

In the result, all these three appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6/SRT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 10(1)Section 115JSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 41(1)

penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In all the appeals for the quantum assessment, the Revenue has raised certain common grounds of appeal. Facts in all the years are almost similar except variation in additions or disallowances, therefore, with the consent of parties

DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,VAPI CIRCLE,, VAPI vs. M/S. BHARAT STEEL SUPPLIERS,, VAPI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 652/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S.Remi Steel House, Ward-7, Vapi. Plot No.95 & 96, Gidc, Nr.Emkay Dyecasting, Silvassa Road, Vapi – 396 195. [Pan: Aaefr 2266 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S.Bharat Steel Suppliers, Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi. Plot No.95 & 96, Gidc, Nr.Emkay Dyecasting, Silvassa Road, Vapi – 396 195. [Pan: Aacfb 5446 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

195. [PAN: AACFB 5446 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri hardik Vora – Advocate Department by Shri R.P.Rastogi – Sr.DR Date of Hearing 16.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement 17.07.2019 O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM: These two appeals filed by the Revenue against the separate impugned orders passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)- Valsad, Valsad dated 04.01.2016 pertaining

THE ITO, WARD- 7,, VAPI vs. M/S. REMI STEEL HOUSE,, VAPI

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 621/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S.Remi Steel House, Ward-7, Vapi. Plot No.95 & 96, Gidc, Nr.Emkay Dyecasting, Silvassa Road, Vapi – 396 195. [Pan: Aaefr 2266 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S.Bharat Steel Suppliers, Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi. Plot No.95 & 96, Gidc, Nr.Emkay Dyecasting, Silvassa Road, Vapi – 396 195. [Pan: Aacfb 5446 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

195. [PAN: AACFB 5446 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri hardik Vora – Advocate Department by Shri R.P.Rastogi – Sr.DR Date of Hearing 16.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement 17.07.2019 O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM: These two appeals filed by the Revenue against the separate impugned orders passed by the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)- Valsad, Valsad dated 04.01.2016 pertaining

GOPAL CHANDAK,SURAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1(2), SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 904/SRT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR
Section 195Section 195(6)Section 250Section 271Section 6

1.T. Act, 1961. 2. It is therefore prayed that the above penalty levied by the assessing officer and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) may please be deleted. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal." 3. In this appeal, the assessee has assailed

LIGI BIJU KODDASARY,VAPI vs. ITO, WARD-5, VAPI, VAPI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 727/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.727/Srt/2024 (Ay 2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Ligi Biju Koddasary Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, B-302, Sapphire Apartment, Vapi, 8Th Floor Fortune Square बनाम Raveshia Park, Murarji Circle, Ii, Above Tvz. Chala, Vs Gidc, Vapi-396 195 Vapi-396 191 [Pan : Anypk 5855 G] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent

Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

195 Vapi-396 191 [PAN : ANYPK 5855 G] अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ" /Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Parin Shah. CA राज" की ओर से /Revenue by Shri Mukesh Jain– Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 28.01.2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of 03.03.2025 pronouncement Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH