Search: penalty u/s 271

5 results for “penalty u/s 271”+ Section 10(14)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)6 Addition to Income5 Disallowance4 Section 153A3 Section 145(3)2 Section 234A2 Section 362 Deduction2

RAEES ALAM SIDDIQUI,GHAZIPUR vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 39/VNS/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi31 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Arvind Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amandeep Kaur, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

u/s 271(1)(c) without appreciating that the Ld. A.O. levied penalty without establishing that the explanation furnished by the appellant was false. 6. Because on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC erred in upholding penalty order pervasive to binding decisions interpreting provision explained by courts. 7. Because

RAEES ALAM SIDDIQUI,GHAZIPUR vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

RAEES ALAM SIDDIQUI,GHAZIPUR vs. DY. C.I.T., RANGE - 1, VARANASI

M/S BANARAS SWARN KALA KENDRA PVT. LTD.,,VARANASI vs. ACIT, CC, VARANASI

M/S AVANTIKA INFRAVENTURE (P) LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VARANASI

M/S AVANTIKA INFRAVENTURE (P) LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, VARANASI

M/S RAJENDRA PRASAD SRIVASTAVA,AZAMGARH vs. ACIT, RANGE - AZAMGARH, AZAMGARH