Which cases are most cited on Section 271F?

State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (60 ITR 239) — 78 citing judgments; CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal (275 ITR 113) — 38 citing judgments; 1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma v. Dy. CIT (174 Taxmann.com 273) — 23 citing judgments; Revenue. I. CIT v. Satish Medical Agencies (292 ITR 163) — 17 citing judgments; 14 (Delhi) 2) Lalit Gulati v. Asstt. CIT (305 Taxmann 11) — 11 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 271F?

BharatTax indexes 927 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 271F of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 271F of the Income Tax Act?

State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (60 ITR 239) is the decision most relied on for Section 271F, cited in 78 judgments. A best judgment assessment must be based on wisdom, truth, and legal principles, not arbitrary caprice. While it involves estimation and guesswork, this must have a reasonable nexus to available material and the case's circumstances.

The decision most relied on for Section 271F is State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (60 ITR 239), cited in 78 of the 927 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 271F

State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty

60 ITR 239 · 1966 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

A best judgment assessment must be based on wisdom, truth, and legal principles, not arbitrary caprice. While it involves estimation and guesswork, this must have a reasonable nexus to available material and the case's circumstances.

CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal

275 ITR 113 · 2005 · High Court

citing judgments

The omission by an Income Tax Officer to initiate penalty proceedings during the assessment, when there is an observation of under-reporting or mis-reporting of income, renders the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, granting the Commissioner jurisdiction to revise such an order under Section 263.

1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma v. Dy. CIT

174 Taxmann.com 273 · 2025 · High Court

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.

Revenue. I. CIT v. Satish Medical Agencies

292 ITR 163 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

A conscious act by the assessee to hide information from the department is a key factor in upholding revenue assessments and penalties.

14 (Delhi) 2) Lalit Gulati v. Asstt. CIT

305 Taxmann 11 · High Court

citing judgments

Gordhanbhai Devjibhai Kapadia v. ITO

177 Taxmann.com 714 · 2025 · High Court

citing judgments

A notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued after March 31, 2021, is invalid if it relies on the extended time limit provided by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, for assessment years prior to 2021-22.

Manubhai A. Sheth v. N. D. Nirgudkar, Second ITO

128 ITR 87 · 1981 · High Court

citing judgments

S.M.I.L.E. Micro Finance Ltd. v. ACIT

479 ITR 172 · 2025 · High Court

citing judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kanubhai Muljibhai Patel

306 ITR 179 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

Jayanthi Shri v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-I, Coimbatore

75 Taxmann.com 248 · 2016 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 271F

Thattantavita Asharaf, Vadakara vs. Income Tax Officer Ward2(2), Kozhikode

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

ITA 900/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 900/Coch/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Thattantavita Asharaf बनाम/ Ito, Ward-2(2) 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Thattantavita House, P.O, Vs. Thuneri, Vadakara, North Block, Mananchira, Kozhikode District-673514. Kozhikode-673001. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aivpa7829G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri R. Krishnan Revenue By: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 22.07.2022 For Ay. 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Imposition Of Penalty U/S 271F Of The Income Tax Act, 1969 (Hereinafter “The Act”) On The Ground Of Failure To Furnish Return Of Income (Roi) As Required U/S 139(1) Or Proviso To That Sub-Section. In This Case, The Assessee Had Filed Return Of Income Belatedly On 28.03.2013 Reflecting An Income Of Rs.3,72,410/- Whereas As Per Section 139(1) Of The Act Assessee Was To File The Return Of Income On 31.07.2011 (And U/S 139(4) By 31.03.2012). 3. The Ao Before Imposing The Penalty Of Rs.5000/- U/S 271F Of The Act Had Issued Notice Dated 21.12.2018 & After Giving Opportunity To Assessee Has Imposed Penalty On 12.03.2019. 2 A.Ys. 2012-12 Thattantavita Asharaf

For Appellant: Shri R. KrishnanFor Respondent: Smt J. M Jamuna Devi, (Sr. AR)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 271FSection 273B

Charles River Laboratories Inc., United States vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITITA 88/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CA

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 271F

Charles River Laboratories Inc., United States vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 90/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CA

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 271F

Charles River Laboratories Inc., United States vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation, Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 89/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CA

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 271F

Ashwin Liladhar Shah, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 44/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Ashwin Liladhar Shah National Faceless Appeal Centre C/O. D. C. Bothara & Co. Delhi Llp (Ca) (Formerly As D. C. Bothara & Co.) 297, Tardeo Road, Vs. Wille Mansion, 1St Floor, Opp. Bank Of India, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400 007

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar SinghFor Respondent: 02.03.2023

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271F

Smt. Varalakshmi, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 181/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Kashinath, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N., D.R

Smt. Varalakshmi, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 180/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Kashinath, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N., D.R

Smt. Varalakshmi, Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 179/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Kashinath, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N., D.R

M/S Divya Enterprise, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(3)(2), Surat

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 215/SRT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) M/S Divya Enterprise, I.T.O., C/O- Ca Mayank Dave, O-19, Ward-3(3)(2), Vs. Panchratna Tower, Opp.- Affil Surat. Tower, L H Road, Surat-395006. Ph. No.-9909777600 Pan No. Aaffd 5058 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 144Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271F

Nagaathinam Rajendiran, Madurai vs. ADIT, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 200/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.200/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Nagarathinam Rajendran, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 35/8, Aruppukottai Main Road, Ward Ii(2), Madurai. Villapuram, Madurai 625 012, Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Abmpr4139C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Gopalan, Irs Retd. Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Dated 20.01.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15 Passed Under Section 271F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri G. Gopalan, IRS Retd. JCITFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271FSection 274

Maltidevi Rammilan Gupta, Mumbai vs. Dgit (Vigilance ) (West), Mumbai

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

ITA 425/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalita Nos. 425, 427 & 428/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2017-18) Maltidevirammilangupta Vs. Dgit (Vigilance West) Room No. 51-14/18, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Himmat Nagar, Salt Pen Bhavan, Mk Road, Road,Near Vidylankar Mumbai – 400020. College, Wadala (E), Mumbai- 400037 Pan/Gir No. : Azzpg2730K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Neha Gupta.Ar Respondent By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Passed U/S 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Filed These Appeals Challenging The Orders Of The Cit(A) On The Levy Of Penalty U/S 272A(1)(C),271Aa & 271F Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Gupta.ARFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 271Section 271FSection 272A(1)(c)

M/S Sanjeev Chirania HUF, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 251/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S Sanjeev Chirania Huf, Ito-28(3)(1), 301, Sona Chambers, 507/509 Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Vs. Jss Road, Chira Bazar, Station Commercial Marine Lines – East, Complex, Vashi, Mumbai-400 002. Navi Mumbai-400703 Pan No. Aarhs 4527 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Ms. Ritu Kamalkishor, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Milind S. Chavan, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 23/03/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/03/2023 Order

For Appellant: Ms. Ritu Kamalkishor, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Milind S. Chavan, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 271F

Ancha Shankar Rao, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle- 67(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1799/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri V. K. Bindal, C. A.; &For Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 271Section 271FSection 274Section 275

Mr. Hothur Mohammed Tauseef, Bellary vs. DCIT-Circle-1, Bellary

ITA 1032/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Hothur Mohammed Tauseef, Sofia House, The Deputy Opp: State Bank Of Commissioner Of Mysore, Income Tax, Infantry Road, Circle – 1, Cantonment, Vs. Bellary. Bellary – 583 104. Pan: Acwpt0308C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri B.S. Balachandran, A.R. Revenue By : Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01-02-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-03-2023 Order Per Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri B.S. Balachandran, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 50C(1)