Section 271A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.441

Section 271A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 441 (Failure to keep, maintain or retain books of account, documents, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 441 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 271A is Surajmal Parsuram Todi v. CIT (222 ITR 691), cited in 114 of the 701 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 271A

Surajmal Parsuram Todi v. CIT
222 ITR 691 · 1996 · High Court
114
citing judgments

A penalty under Section 271B for failure to get accounts audited cannot be levied if a penalty under Section 271A has already been imposed for non-maintenance of books of account.

CIT v. S.K. Gupta & Co.
322 ITR 86 · 2010 · High Court
110
citing judgments

If a penalty is levied under Section 271A for failure to maintain books of account, then a separate penalty under Section 271B for failure to get accounts audited under Section 44AB cannot also be levied.

CIT v. Khoday Eswarsa & Sons 1972 CTR (SC) 295
83 ITR 369 · 1972 · Supreme Court
94
citing judgments

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied solely on the basis of findings in the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer must discharge the burden of proving concealment or inaccurate particulars with additional material.

CIT v. Bisauli Tractors
299 ITR 219 · 2008 · High Court
81
citing judgments

If an assessee has not maintained books of accounts, the question of getting those accounts audited under Section 44AB does not arise, and therefore, a penalty under Section 271B for failure to get accounts audited cannot be levied. Non-maintenance of books is separately punishable under Section 271A.

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.

Bharat Construction Co. v. ITO
153 CTR 414 · 1999 · High Court
49
citing judgments

When an assessee fails to maintain books of account, resulting in a confirmed penalty under section 271A, no additional penalty under section 271B can be levied for the failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB, as there are no accounts to audit.

Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT
256 ITR 20 · 2002 · High Court
42
citing judgments

Books of account include electronic records and are maintained to provide credible financial data for tax returns and to determine income. Penalty under section 271B for not getting accounts audited is applicable only when accounts are maintained, whereas section 271A applies if no accounts are maintained at all.

1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma v. Dy. CIT
174 Taxmann.com 273 · 2025 · High Court
23
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2015-16 after April 1, 2021, are barred by limitation and invalid, as per the amended provisions of the Finance Act, 2020.

Krish Kumar v. ITO
107 Taxmann.com 464 · 2019 · Supreme Court
21
citing judgments

An addition under section 69A is justified when cash deposits in a bank account significantly exceed reported sales and the assessee fails to provide a satisfactory explanation for the source of these deposits.

CIT v. Surinder Pal Anand, Surinder Pal Anand
242 CTR 61 · 2011 · High Court
20
citing judgments

When an assessee opts for the presumptive taxation scheme under Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, offering income at a specified percentage of gross receipts, they are exempt from maintaining books of account and are not obligated to explain individual entries of cash deposits unless such entries lack nexus with the gross receipts.

Judgments on Section 271A

M/S R. K. Mondal & Brothers, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(1), Durgapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA

ITA 1146/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1145 & 1146/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. R.K. Mondal & Vs. I.T.O, W-1(1), Durgapur Brothers Aayakar Bithi, City Centre, Vill + P.O: Kajora Gram, Durgapur, Durgapur – 713216. Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713338. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfr 6294 C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri U. Dasgupta, Advocate Respondent By :Shri G.H. Seema, Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2018 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: These Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11, Are Directed Against Orders Passed By The Cit(A)- Durgapur, In Appeal No.146/147/Cit(A)/Dgp/2012-13, Dated 18.02.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271A & 271(1)(B) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Since, These Two Captioned Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Same Assessment Year, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. These Two Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Cit(A) Confirming The Penalty In Respect Of Violation Of Section 271A & 271(1)(B) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. M/S. R.K. Mondal & Brothers

For Appellant: Shri U. Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.H. Seema, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)Section 271ASection 44A

M/S R. K. Mondal & Brothers, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-1(1), Durgapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee (in ITA

ITA 1145/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1145 & 1146/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. R.K. Mondal & Vs. I.T.O, W-1(1), Durgapur Brothers Aayakar Bithi, City Centre, Vill + P.O: Kajora Gram, Durgapur, Durgapur – 713216. Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713338. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfr 6294 C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri U. Dasgupta, Advocate Respondent By :Shri G.H. Seema, Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2018 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: These Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11, Are Directed Against Orders Passed By The Cit(A)- Durgapur, In Appeal No.146/147/Cit(A)/Dgp/2012-13, Dated 18.02.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 271A & 271(1)(B) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Since, These Two Captioned Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee, Same Assessment Year, Therefore, These Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. 3. These Two Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Cit(A) Confirming The Penalty In Respect Of Violation Of Section 271A & 271(1)(B) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. M/S. R.K. Mondal & Brothers

For Appellant: Shri U. Dasgupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.H. Seema, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(b)Section 271ASection 44A

Vardhman Remedies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6773/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), बनाम/ M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan H-405, Gokul Residency, Vs. M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.142/Mum/2017 Arising Out Of Ita No. 1004/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., 13(3)(2), H-405, Gokul Residency, Aayakar Bhavan 6773/M/2016 & –Co.142/Mu/2017 Near Samta Nagar, Vs. M.K. Road Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400020 Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Vardhman Remedies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6772/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), बनाम/ M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan H-405, Gokul Residency, Vs. M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.142/Mum/2017 Arising Out Of Ita No. 1004/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., 13(3)(2), H-405, Gokul Residency, Aayakar Bhavan 6773/M/2016 & –Co.142/Mu/2017 Near Samta Nagar, Vs. M.K. Road Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400020 Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Vardhaman Remedies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(3)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1495/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), बनाम/ M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan H-405, Gokul Residency, Vs. M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.142/Mum/2017 Arising Out Of Ita No. 1004/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., 13(3)(2), H-405, Gokul Residency, Aayakar Bhavan 6773/M/2016 & –Co.142/Mu/2017 Near Samta Nagar, Vs. M.K. Road Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400020 Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

Vardhman Remedies P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(3)(3)

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1494/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), बनाम/ M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan H-405, Gokul Residency, Vs. M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.142/Mum/2017 Arising Out Of Ita No. 1004/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., 13(3)(2), H-405, Gokul Residency, Aayakar Bhavan 6773/M/2016 & –Co.142/Mu/2017 Near Samta Nagar, Vs. M.K. Road Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400020 Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C

ITO 13(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Vardhman Remedies P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1004/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), बनाम/ M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan H-405, Gokul Residency, Vs. M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.142/Mum/2017 Arising Out Of Ita No. 1004/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt बनाम/ Income Tax Officer 13(3)(3), Ltd., R.No.227,Aayakar Bhavan Vs. H-405, Gokul Residency, M.K. Road Near Samta Nagar, Mumbai 400020 Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S.Vardhman Remedies Pvt Ltd., 13(3)(2), H-405, Gokul Residency, Aayakar Bhavan 6773/M/2016 & –Co.142/Mu/2017 Near Samta Nagar, Vs. M.K. Road Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400020 Mumbai-400101 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyadhar
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69C