Section 271 of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 271 is Premier Breweries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (372 ITR 180), cited in 52 of the 131 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 271

Premier Breweries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax
372 ITR 180 · 2015 · Supreme Court
52
citing judgments

Whether an assessee has shown 'reasonable cause' under Section 273B, particularly in the context of penalties under Section 271D for violations of Section 269SS, is a question of law involving a legal inference from primary facts. Penalties under Section 271D are not leviable if reasonable cause is established, even for journal entries, provided transactions are genuine and bona fide.

CIT v. Rampur Engg
309 ITR 143 · 2009 · High Court
32
citing judgments

The power to impose penalty under section 271 of the Income-tax Act depends on the Assessing Officer's satisfaction, which must be recorded during the proceedings. If the officer is not satisfied and has not recorded this satisfaction, the penalty cannot be exercised.

CIT v. Ramaniyam Homes Pvt. Ltd.
384 ITR 530 · 2016 · High Court
27
citing judgments

Benefits received by a company from its business operations, such as waived loans not used for capital assets, are taxable under section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Mayawati v. CIT
321 ITR 349 · 2010 · High Court
20
citing judgments
ITO vs. Shakti Foundation., (2016) 48 CCH 0065 (Jaipur) 10. 11. Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. v. DCIT
61 ITD 227 · 1997 · ITAT
12
citing judgments
CIT v. Raj Trading Co.
217 ITR 208 · 1996 · High Court
10
citing judgments
368 ITR 722 (Bombay). (vii) CIT v. Gurdaspur Cooperative Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd.
159 Taxmann.com 7 · 2024 · Supreme Court
9
citing judgments
Taxman 488 (SC) 5. Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa, 82 ITR 26, (SC) 6. Brij Mohan v. CIT
226 ITR 442 · 1997 · Supreme Court
9
citing judgments
CIT v. Gurdaspur Cooperative Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd.
35 Taxmann.com 395 · 2013 · High Court
9
citing judgments
Prahlad Bhattacharya v. CIT
386 ITR 708 · High Court
8
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 271

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, NEW DELHI vs. DHEERAJ CHAUDHARY, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6380/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumaracit Vs. Sh. Dheeraj Chaudhary Central Circle-8 Flat No.1A Empire Estate, New Delhi Sultanpur, M.G. Road, New Delhi 110030 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaspk 9267 B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Monalisha Maity, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 274

PRAVEEN GARG HUF,ROURKELA vs. ITO, WARD 1, ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 823/CTK/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No.822&823/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Praveen Garg Huf Ito, Ward-1, Rourkela Gurudrawara Road, Rourkela, Vs Odisha-769001. (Pan: Aahhp0557Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijeet Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 271

PRAVEEN GARG HUF,ROURKELA vs. ITO, WARD 1, ROURKELA, ROURKELA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 822/CTK/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No.822&823/Ctk/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Praveen Garg Huf Ito, Ward-1, Rourkela Gurudrawara Road, Rourkela, Vs Odisha-769001. (Pan: Aahhp0557Q) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijeet Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 271

JIA MONGRI SANGMA,NONGALBIRA vs. ITO, SHILLONG

In the result, the quantum appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the penalty appeals are allowed with the above observation

ITA 442/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shriduvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Sarma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dipak Singh, DR
Section 144Section 271

VENKATA RAO POGARTHI,NARSARAOPET vs. NEAC (CIT APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Itat With A Delay Of 55 Days. During The Hearing Proceedings Before

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 254(1)Section 69

ACIT, CIRCLE-1 KALYAN, KALYAN vs. F T TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED, BHIWANDI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6238/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)

GANESH RAM DOKANIA,BANKA vs. ACIT, CIR-2, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 238/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Years: 2014-15 Ganesh Ram Dokania………..……..………………….……….……….……Appellant Dokania Market, Aliganj, Bihar-813102.. [Pan: Aadfg1795P] Vs. Acit, Circle-2, Patna…….………...…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Rastogi, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. A H Chowdhury, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 08, 2026 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.03.2025 Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014–15. 2. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In Real Estate Business & The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 15.11.2016 In Response To Notice U/S 153A Of The Act By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.31,56,350/-. Notice U/S. 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued & Subsequently, Assessment U/S. 153A/144 Was Completed At A Total Income Of Rs.25,67,79,232/- Wherein The Assessing Officer Imposed Penalty U/S. 271Aab Of The Act At Rs. 1,60,00,000/- On Undisclosed Income.

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

GOPAL MATHURDAS PARIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both these appeals are also partly allowed

ITA 408/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

GOPAL MATHURDAS PARIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both these appeals are also partly allowed

ITA 407/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

GOPAL MATHURDAS PARIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both these appeals are also partly allowed

ITA 406/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

ACIT-16(3), FOURTH FLOOR vs. MUFFAZAL LAKDAWALA, RNA MIRAGE S.K AHIRE MARG

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 3254/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhriassessment Year: 2020-21 Acit – 16 (3), Muffazal Lakdawala, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Worli Mumbai – 400018. Mumbai – 400020. Pan – Aacpl 2097 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Sh. Priyank Ghia A/W Ms. Simoni Shah, Ld. Ars. Revenue By : Sh. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 14.03.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2020-21. 2. In The Instant Case, The Assessee Had Taken/Received Unsecured Loan To The Tune Of Rs. 3,28,42,847/- In Total From The Lenders, As Detailed Below: - Anjuman E Mohammadi – 1,50,00,000/- Reshma Jai Ram Shetty – 1,75,00,000/- Digestive Health Institute By Dr. Muffi Pvt. Ltd. – 3,42,847/-

For Appellant: Sh. Priyank Ghia a/w Ms. Simoni Shah, Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Sh. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, Ld. SR. D.R
Section 133Section 250Section 68

RAHULKUMAR BAJAJ CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1769/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2173/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2172/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2170/PUN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

SHRI DATTA SHETKARI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,SHIROL vs. DCIT, CIR-1, KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2169/PUN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 40A(2)(a)

AKSHAYA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2605/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 68

ANNE MANOJ CHOWDARY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTER CIRCLE-1(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1437/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1437/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Anne Manoj Chowdary Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(4) Pan:Ainpc5963B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Phaneendra Nag, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rehman, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

ANITA BASAK,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC 1(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2174/KOL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Anita Basak Acit, Central Circle 1(1), C/O. S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Kolkata, Advocates, Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, 2, Garstin Place, 2 Nd Floor, Suite 110 Shanti Pally, 5 Th Floor, Vs. No.203, Off Hare Street, Kolkata, Eastern Metropolitian By Pass, West Bengal-700001, Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahhpb5785B Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ruchika Sharma, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ruchika Sharma, DR
Section 1Section 133Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144ASection 145(3)Section 270ASection 271Section 271ASection 44A

MOHAMMED SHARIF NIZAMUDDIN DALVI ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 41(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5224/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 144Section 250Section 271ASection 69

Showing 1–20 of 131 · Page 1 of 7