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.

10 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 251(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi160Mumbai133Raipur71Jaipur55Bangalore45Indore44Chandigarh37Hyderabad31Pune26Ahmedabad24Allahabad20Chennai20Kolkata20Rajkot16Lucknow14Patna11Nagpur11Surat10Guwahati5Jabalpur5Jodhpur4Dehradun3Varanasi1Cochin1Ranchi1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 14817Section 271(1)(c)12Section 379Penalty9Addition to Income9Section 1448Section 1475Section 2504Section 143(3)4

VASIMKHAN HAMIDKHAN PATHAN,DANG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 704/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.704/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Vasimkhan Hamidkhan Pathan Income Tax Officer Ward-5, Navsari, Income Ta Office, Charpool, O Main Bazar, At & Po Waghai Vs. Awabaug, Navsari-396445 Tal, Dang-394730 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bptpp 6081 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

section 271(1)(c) of the Act the authority is given the discretion to levy a penalty if there is concealment of particulars of income and even as regards the quantum of the penalty there is a discretion. Of greater importance is the necessity for a definite finding that there is concealment, as without such a finding of concealment, there

Section 2714
Cash Deposit3
Reopening of Assessment3

GIRDHARBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA,SURAT vs. ITO(INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), SURAT

In the result, additional grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 143/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.143/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Court Hearing) Girdharbhai Haribhai Gajera Income Tax Officer 1,Vrushal Nagar, Opp. (International Taxation), 107, 1St Vs. Ktargam Police Station, Floor, Anavil Business Centre, Katargam Road, Surat-35004 Adajan-Hazira Road, Opp. Star Bazar, Adajan, Surat-395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abepg 7339 M (Assessee ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Hiren R.Vepari, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 271Section 45(2)

Penalty notice u/s. 271(l)(b) was also issued on 08.09.2017. The assessee with other persons have transferred two non- agricultural land to Shanti Integrated Textile Park Pvt. Ltd. and Assessee’s share was Rs.2.28,72,600. The assessee has not offered any capital gain or business income on sale of above land. The assessee vide letter dated 22nd December

KANAIYALAL LABHUBHAI NAROLA,SURAT vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3,(2), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurpose

ITA 816/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

2) of section 251 of the Act requires that the CIT(A) or the JCIT shall\nnot enhance an assessment or penalty unless the appellant had a reasonable\nopportunity of showing cause against such enhancement. Therefore, the CIT(A)\nwas statutorily required to grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee before\nmaking addition u/s 69A of the Act. In view

GAURAVA MISHRA,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(8), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 104/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.104/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) Gaurav Mishra, Vs. Ito, Present Address: - Ward -3 (2)(8), 80, Bayshore Road, Unit No.28, Surat (Costa Del Sol), Singapore – 46992 Permanent Address: 605, Spathik Shilla, Sundar Nagar Purani Basti, So Raipur – 492001, C.G., India "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Amkpm6042J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Veekass Sharma, Ar Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 127Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 250

2) may kindly be quashed. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessment order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is illegal, bad-in-law & void-ab- initio inasmuch as the assessment proceedings has been initiated without obtaining the mandatory sanction u/s 151, which is a condition precedent for assumption

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDALI LTD.,,BHARUCH vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2),, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1243/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 234ASection 271Section 37

251 & 252/SRT/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtual Court) Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand Udyog Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mandali Ltd., Ward-1(2), Bharuch. At – Pandvai, Tal. Hansot, Dist. Bharuch, 394 810. PAN : AAAAS1760N APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri S N Soparkar -Sr. Advocate With Ms Urvashi Shodhan Advocate Respondent by Shri O P Singh

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI LTD.,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 251/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 234ASection 271Section 37

251 & 252/SRT/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtual Court) Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand Udyog Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mandali Ltd., Ward-1(2), Bharuch. At – Pandvai, Tal. Hansot, Dist. Bharuch, 394 810. PAN : AAAAS1760N APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri S N Soparkar -Sr. Advocate With Ms Urvashi Shodhan Advocate Respondent by Shri O P Singh

SHREE KHEDUT SAHAKARI KHAND UDYOG MANDLI,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BHARUCH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 252/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 234ASection 271Section 37

251 & 252/SRT/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15) (Virtual Court) Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand Udyog Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mandali Ltd., Ward-1(2), Bharuch. At – Pandvai, Tal. Hansot, Dist. Bharuch, 394 810. PAN : AAAAS1760N APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri S N Soparkar -Sr. Advocate With Ms Urvashi Shodhan Advocate Respondent by Shri O P Singh

KEVALRAM LALARAM CHAUDHARI,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(3)(3), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.210/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Kevalram Lalaram Chaudhari, Vs. Ito, 275, Bhagirath Nagar – 2, Anjani Ward – 3(3)(3), Road, Varachha Road, Surat – Surat 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahrpc3926F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2025

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 and 271F r.w.s. 274 of the Act were also initiated by the AO. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed this appeal before the CIT(A). He issued 4 notices fixing the hearing on 22.01.2021, 27.06.2023, 05.07.2023, 10.11.2023, 12.11.2024 and 28.11.2024. All the notices were duly served electronically

VANMALIBHAI MULJIBHAI PATEL L/H RANJANBEN DEEPAKBHAI PATEL,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD 5, NAVSARI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 345/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.345/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Vanmalibhai Muljibhai Patel, Vs. Ito, L/H Of Ranjanben Deepakbhai Patel Ward - 5, 16, Shrinikunj Society, Ashabaug, Navsari Navsari - 396445 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Abjpp3114G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Ms. Jayshree Thakur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

Section 127Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 251(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Act was also separately initiated. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The appellant raised various grounds of appeal before the CIT(A), which are at pages 2 of the appellate order. The CIT(A) reproduced the submission of the appellant, which

PRIME CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD,SURAT vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 19/SRT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.19/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 (Hybrid Hearing) Prime Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Vs. Acit, Khatodra, Ring Road, Surat – Circle-1(1)(1), 395002 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcp7117M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Hiren Vepari, Ca Respondent By Shri Aashish Pophare, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/11/2025

Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

2) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or vary any of the grounds of appeal.” 3. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is a non-filer and did not file any return of income for AY 2013-14. After recording the reasons, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 19.04.2021 after obtaining