Search: penalty u/s 271 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases 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.

24,924 results for “penalty u/s 271”

Sorted by relevance

Delhi6,612 Mumbai5,986 Ahmedabad1,414 Kolkata1,412 Pune1,097 Jaipur1,063 Bangalore1,023 Chennai852 Indore796 Hyderabad648 Surat574 Chandigarh514 Amritsar325 Rajkot302 Raipur251 Cochin208 Visakhapatnam201 Lucknow187 Nagpur169 Karnataka164 Cuttack154 Agra132 Patna128 Ranchi105 Allahabad104 Dehradun102 Guwahati91 Jodhpur76 Jabalpur70 Panaji54 Calcutta39 Varanasi23 Kerala18 SC14 Telangana9 Rajasthan4 Punjab & Haryana2 Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)175 Penalty77 Addition to Income66 Section 143(3)55 Section 153A41 Section 271(1)27 Disallowance25 Section 27421 Section 27116 Section 148

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 310/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80

u/s 274 read with sec. 271(1)(c), penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for concealment of income

Showing 1–20 of 24,924 · Page 1 of 1,247

...

16

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 54/PAT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271(1) (C) cannot be levied imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 57/PAT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271(1) (C) cannot be levied imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 55/PAT/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271(1) (C) cannot be levied imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 53/PAT/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271(1) (C) cannot be levied imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 52/PAT/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271(1) (C) cannot be levied imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot

PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LIMITED,PATNA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 56/PAT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Jha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rinku Singh, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

271(1) (C) cannot be levied imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot

DWARKA GEMS LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 847/JPR/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2024AY 2010-2011

For Appellant: Shri Harshit Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40Section 80I

271(1)(c) of the Act and the officer initiating penalty has to clearly specify\nas to under which limb the penalty is being proposed to be imposed. The Hon'ble\nKarnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs.\nManjunatha Cotton And Ginning Factory (2013) 359 ITR 565, after elaborately\nconsidering the penalty provisions u/s

THE DCIT (CENTRAL), INDORE vs. M/S KETI CONSTRUCTION (INDIA) LTD. , INDORE

In the result all the grounds raised by Revenue in the case of

ITA 877/IND/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act and also the initiation of the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and also

THE DCIT-CENTRAL-2, INDORE vs. M/S. KALYAN TOLL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., INDORE

In the result all the grounds raised by Revenue in the case of

ITA 878/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2010-11

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 36

u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act and also the initiation of the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and also

PANKAJKUMAR CHIMANLAL LODHIYA,RAKJOT vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 78/RJT/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

penalty of Rs. 1,01,970/-, u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, 1961.\n20.\nTherefore, total Penalty u/s 271

SMT. SUMAN LAKHANI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the penalty amounting to Rs

ITA 857/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Madan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Janardan Das, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36

penalty u/s 271(1 )(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Penalty u/s 271(l)(c) - the additions including addition

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated\nhereinabove

ITA 309/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80

u/s\n274 read with sec. 271(1)(c), penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated for concealment\nof income

A.C.I.T. CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, MUMBAI vs. ANKUR DRUGS & PHARMA LTD., MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 7529/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 7529/Mum/2011 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri. Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri. R.P Meena, CIT DR

Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 80I

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) , vide penalty order dated 29-06-2010 passed by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the 1961 Act. 5. Aggrieved

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. LATE BAIJNATH AGARWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of revenue as well as the Cross Objection of assessee is dismissed

ITA 477/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

u/s 271 (1)(c) dt. 16.09.2016 and imposed penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act. As no penalty u/s

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GRANITE GATE PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 2239/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N Mishra

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Sapra, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Saroha, CIT (DR)

u/s 271(l)(c) o f I. T. Act. 2.1. During penalty proceedings u/s 271(l)(c) for asstt. year

DCIT - (LTU) - 1 , MUMBAI vs. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 6267/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Yadav &For Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh (CIT-DR)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, on the ground that the A.O has levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) read

T.SAIMATHA,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE ACIT,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 318/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Mar 2020AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.318/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) T.Saimatha Vs Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.47-11-9 Income Tax Dwarakanagar Circle-1(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan :Acdpt7788H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.320/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2008-09) T.Satyanarayana Vs Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.47-11-9 Income Tax Dwarakanagar Circle-1(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aaqpt9170N] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri V.Rama Mohan, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 28.02.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.03.2020 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Rama Mohan, DR

Section 132Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271A

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) and conducting the proceedings u/s 271AAA is bad in law. The penalties u/s 271(1)(c) and 271AAA

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 730/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt. Roli Agarwal (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

271(1)(c) Penalty imposable (100% of tax sought to evaded) Rs. 45,555/- Penalty imposable (300% of tax sought to evaded) Rs. 1,36,665/- Penalty levied (100% of the tax sought to evaded Rs. 45,555/- In view of the above, a penalty of Rs. 45,555/- is hereby levied u/s

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 731/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt. Roli Agarwal (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 92C

271(1)(c) Penalty imposable (100% of tax sought to evaded) Rs. 45,555/- Penalty imposable (300% of tax sought to evaded) Rs. 1,36,665/- Penalty levied (100% of the tax sought to evaded Rs. 45,555/- In view of the above, a penalty of Rs. 45,555/- is hereby levied u/s