Section 271F of the Income Tax Act

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
78
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
38
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
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.

Revenue. I. CIT v. Satish Medical Agencies
292 ITR 163 · 2007 · High Court
17
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
11
citing judgments
Gordhanbhai Devjibhai Kapadia v. ITO
177 Taxmann.com 714 · 2025 · High Court
10
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
9
citing judgments
S.M.I.L.E. Micro Finance Ltd. v. ACIT
479 ITR 172 · 2025 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kanubhai Muljibhai Patel
306 ITR 179 · 2008 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Jayanthi Shri v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-I, Coimbatore
75 Taxmann.com 248 · 2016 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 271F

Shri Shankar Lal Kumawat, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-2, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 1391/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jul 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri K. L. Choudhary (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 148Section 50CSection 54

Shri Shankar Lal Kumawat, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-2, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 1390/JPR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jul 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri K. L. Choudhary (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)
Section 148Section 50CSection 54

Shri Mark Lee, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-1, Jaipur

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 218/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Sh. H. R. Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Shri Mark Lee, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-1, Jaipur

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 217/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Sh. H. R. Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Shri Mark Lee, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-1, Jaipur

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 216/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Sh. H. R. Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Shri Mark Lee, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-1, Jaipur

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 215/JPR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2020AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Sh. H. R. Agarwal (CA) &For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Late Abbashbhai Ismailbhai Shekh, L/H. Jenamben Abbasbhai Shekh, Jamnagar vs. The ITO -Ward- 3(5), Jnr, /Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 173/RJT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.173 To 177/Rjt/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2011-12) बनाम/ Late Abbashbhai Ismail Shekh I.T.O., L/H Jenamben Abbasbhai Shekh, Ward-1(5), Vs. Vanza No Delo, O/S Khoja Gate, Jamnagar. Sandhi Jamatkhana Street, Jamnagar.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal , A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suhas Mistry, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148

M/S. Jana Small Finance Bank Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the captioned appeals of the assessee is allowed for 10

ITA 1265/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Roti, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 234ASection 250Section 37(1)

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Smt. Vindhya Mudunuru, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 536/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.U.Mini Chandran, Sr.DR
Section 139Section 271F

Tamil Nadu Fisheries Development Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2864/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2863 & 2864/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tamil Nadu Fisheries Development Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Corporation Limited, 167, Poonamallee Income Tax High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaact2395J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai Both Dated 29.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Passed Under Section 271B As Well As 271F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Filed Against Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271B Of The Act For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 273BSection 44A

Tamil Nadu Fisheries Development Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in I

ITA 2863/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2863 & 2864/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tamil Nadu Fisheries Development Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Corporation Limited, 167, Poonamallee Income Tax High Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaact2395J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2020 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai Both Dated 29.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Passed Under Section 271B As Well As 271F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]. First We Shall Take Up The Appeal Filed Against Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271B Of The Act For Adjudication.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271ASection 271BSection 273BSection 44A

Sri .K.P.Musthafa, Kannur vs. The ACIT, Kannur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 622/COCH/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Jan 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K.

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 271BSection 271FSection 274

Shri Rajesh Ajjavara, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 357/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 271Section 271F

Shri Rajesh Ajjavara, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2606/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 271Section 271F

Shri Rajesh Ajjavara, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2605/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 271Section 271F

Shri Rajesh Ajjavara, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 2604/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 271Section 271F

Asadullah Khan, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Mandya

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 2077/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Karuppusamy, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 246Section 246ASection 253Section 271(1)(b)Section 275Section 275(1)(c)

Shri.Rajesh Suresh Vernekar, Davangere vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(5), Davangere

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1746/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. CIT(D.R)
Section 271F

Shri Prem Singh, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bharatpur

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

ITA 1039/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Manmohan Kandpal (JCIT)
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 274Section 69

Shri Prem Singh, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bharatpur

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

ITA 1038/JPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Manmohan Kandpal (JCIT)
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 271FSection 274Section 69