Search: penalty u/s 271 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Delhi2,127 Mumbai1,780 Ahmedabad536 Jaipur526 Chennai380 Indore361 Surat334 Kolkata329 Pune308 Hyderabad304 Bangalore295 Rajkot204 Chandigarh202 Raipur191 Amritsar125 Nagpur108 Patna92 Cochin91 Visakhapatnam88 Lucknow83 Allahabad81 Agra68 Dehradun60 Guwahati59 Ranchi49 Cuttack49 Jodhpur42 Jabalpur41 Panaji20 Varanasi13

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)138 Section 271(1)(b)107 Penalty90 Section 142(1)82 Addition to Income74 Section 143(3)61 Section 14853 Section 14742 Section 250

MOULIMANI IMPEX PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1(1)(3), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 534/SRT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) of the 1 Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of invalid penalty order in which the limb of levy of penalty under section

MOULIMANI IMPEX PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 1(1)(3), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 536/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 271(1)(c)

Showing 1–20 of 334 · Page 1 of 17

...

40

Section 254(1)38

Search & Seizure25

Reopening of Assessment19

u/s 271(1)(c) of the 1 Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of invalid penalty order in which the limb of levy of penalty under section

MOULIMANI IMPEX PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1(1)(3), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 535/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) of the 1 Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of invalid penalty order in which the limb of levy of penalty under section

MOULIMANI IMPEX PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 1(1)(3), SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 533/SRT/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) of the 1 Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of invalid penalty order in which the limb of levy of penalty under section

PINKY MANISHKUMAR JARIWALA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee, in ITA No

ITA 280/SRT/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.280 To 282/Srt/2022 Assessment Years: (2009-10) (Physical Hearing) Pinky Manishkumar Jariwala, Vs. The Ito, 4/1710, Nawabwadi, Begampura, Ward – 2(2)(3), Surat – 395003. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahnpj7591D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 23/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

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

section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, and two penalty orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) and 271

PINKY MANISHKUMAR JARIWALA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee, in ITA No

ITA 281/SRT/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.280 To 282/Srt/2022 Assessment Years: (2009-10) (Physical Hearing) Pinky Manishkumar Jariwala, Vs. The Ito, 4/1710, Nawabwadi, Begampura, Ward – 2(2)(3), Surat – 395003. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahnpj7591D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 23/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

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

section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, and two penalty orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) and 271

PINKY MANISHKUMAR JARIWALA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(3), SURAT

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee, in ITA No

ITA 282/SRT/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.280 To 282/Srt/2022 Assessment Years: (2009-10) (Physical Hearing) Pinky Manishkumar Jariwala, Vs. The Ito, 4/1710, Nawabwadi, Begampura, Ward – 2(2)(3), Surat – 395003. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ahnpj7591D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By Date Of Hearing 23/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

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

section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, and two penalty orders passed by Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) and 271

YASH BHUPESHBHAI TAMAKUWALA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2)(5), NOW INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 580/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.580/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) Yash Bhupeshbhai Tamakuwala, Vs. The Ito, 1/208, Kharadi Sheri, Nanpura, Ward- 1(2)(6), Surat – 395001. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ajypt3602P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 271(1) (c ) of the Act and therefore, assessing officer stated that penalty proceedings u/s 271(1

SHRI VIJAY CHAMPAK PATEL,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 281/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.281/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vijay Champak Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pachhlu Faliyu, Near Water Ward-6(4), Surat Tank, Bharthana, Vesu, Surat

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah - CAFor Respondent: Shri O P Meena – Sr. DR

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54ESection 54F

section 54F of the Act, during the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, while making the addition the Assessing Officer had initiated penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act observing as follows:- “By claiming incorrect deduction, the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his income, for which, penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 190/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA , SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 189/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,SILVASSA vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 191/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, SILVASSA WARD , SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 186/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 187/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 192/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO,WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 193/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIKAS AGARWAL,DADRA AND NAGAR HAVELI vs. ITO, WARD SILVASSA, SILVASSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 188/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

penalty appeal till the date of passing the impugned order by CIT(A) on 24.01.2025. The addition was made u/s 69A of the Act, and hence, the AO rightly invoked provisions of section 271(1

VIRAJ SHIRISHKUMAR MODI,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 633/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Surat21 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.631 To 637/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Viraj Shirishkumar Modi, Vs. The Dcit, 5, Dwarkadhish Society, Palanpur Patia, Central Circle – 1, Rander Road, Surat – 395009. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bdbpm7942L (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bipin Jariwala, Advocate Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2023

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

u/s. 143(2), that remained not complied with, on part of the Assessee. In view of the above discussion, the action of the AO in imposing penalty under Section 271(1

VIRAJ SHIRISHKUMAR MODI,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 634/SRT/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Surat21 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.631 To 637/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Viraj Shirishkumar Modi, Vs. The Dcit, 5, Dwarkadhish Society, Palanpur Patia, Central Circle – 1, Rander Road, Surat – 395009. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bdbpm7942L (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bipin Jariwala, Advocate Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2023

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

u/s. 143(2), that remained not complied with, on part of the Assessee. In view of the above discussion, the action of the AO in imposing penalty under Section 271(1

VIRAJ SHIRISHKUMAR MODI,SURAT vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, SURAT, SURAT

In the result, appeals filed by assessee (in ITA Nos

ITA 637/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Surat21 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.631 To 637/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2012-13 To 2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Viraj Shirishkumar Modi, Vs. The Dcit, 5, Dwarkadhish Society, Palanpur Patia, Central Circle – 1, Rander Road, Surat – 395009. Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bdbpm7942L (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Bipin Jariwala, Advocate Appellant By Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2023

Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

u/s. 143(2), that remained not complied with, on part of the Assessee. In view of the above discussion, the action of the AO in imposing penalty under Section 271(1