Which cases are most cited on Section 272A(2)(k)?

Lingeshwara Creations v. PCIT (168 Taxmann.com 383) — 20 citing judgments; CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. (244 ITR 417) — 19 citing judgments; Technologies v. CIT (195 Taxmann 323) — 9 citing judgments; 1. CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. (157 Taxmann 52) — 5 citing judgments; U S Technologies P. Ltd. v. CIT (453 ITR 644) — 4 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 272A(2)(k)?

BharatTax indexes 249 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act?

Lingeshwara Creations v. PCIT (168 Taxmann.com 383) is the decision most relied on for Section 272A(2)(k), cited in 20 judgments. Late fees under Section 234E cannot be imposed while processing TDS applications under Section 200A if Section 200A was not in effect during the relevant assessment years.

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.465

Section 272A(2)(k) falls under section 272A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 465 (Penalty for failure to answer questions, sign statements, Furnish information, returns or statements, allow inspections, etc) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 465 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 272A(2)(k) is Lingeshwara Creations v. PCIT (168 Taxmann.com 383), cited in 20 of the 249 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 272A(2)(k)

Lingeshwara Creations v. PCIT

168 Taxmann.com 383 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

Late fees under Section 234E cannot be imposed while processing TDS applications under Section 200A if Section 200A was not in effect during the relevant assessment years.

CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd.

244 ITR 417 · 2000 · High Court

citing judgments

Penalty under section 272A(2) cannot be levied for mere technical or venial breaches of tax law, especially when the revenue has not suffered any loss due to the assessee's actions.

Technologies v. CIT

195 Taxmann 323 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

1. CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd.

157 Taxmann 52 · High Court

citing judgments

U S Technologies P. Ltd. v. CIT

453 ITR 644 · 2023 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Haryana Distillery Ltd. v. JCIT

97 Taxmann.com 571 · Reported

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 272A(2)(k)

ITO (TDS), Udaipur vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Udaipur

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

ITA 385/JODH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmithe Income Tax Officer (Tds) Vs M/S. Icici Bank Ltd. Udaipur Bapu Bazar, Opp. Town Hall, Udaipur (Appellant) (Respondent) Tan No. Jdht00700A

Section 272A(2)(k)

Park Land Hospitality Ltd, New Delhi vs. JCIT Range-76, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6960/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.M. Singh, Sr.DR

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(g)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

Park Land Hospitality Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, Range-76, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6959/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.M. Singh, Sr.DR

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(g)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

M/S. Mangesh Traders, Aurangabad vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Appeals) -1, Aurangabad

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 147/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani

Section 272(2)(k)Section 272A(2)(k)

Executive Engineer, Latur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, TDS Range, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 587/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 200Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

Finance Department Zilha Parishad, Latur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, Range - TDS Range, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 586/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 200Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

Ganpati Chowk Shopping Festival, Pune vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (TDS), Pune

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

ITA 177/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.177/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ganpati Chowk Shopping Festival, The Additional Aop, Vs Commissioner Of Income 100/1, Poona Guest House, Laxmi Tax(Tds). Road, Budhwar Peth, Pune – 411002. Pan: Aaaag 8339 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Ex-Parte Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-10, Pune Dated 09.08.2017 Emanating From The Addl.Cit(Tds)’S Order, Under Section 272A(2)(K)/274 R.W.S 200(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Also Called As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year 2011- 12. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Ganpati Chowk Shopping Festival 2010 Is The Association Of Persons Having Tan No Pneg11514G. 2. It Filed Tds Returns U/S 200 (3) In Form No 26Q For The 1St Quarter Of Fy 2010.11 On 07.03.2012 Against The Due Date Of Return 15.7.2010 Belated About 601 Days. 3. The Aop Could Not File The Tds Returns For The Said Quarter Because Of The Reason That Required Pan Nos Of The Aop Were Not

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)

Deputy Collector Office, Udgir vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, TDS Range, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 319/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.319/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : - Deputy Collector Office, The Jcit, Tds, Range, Main Road, Udgir, Tq.Udgir, Vs Nashik. Dist.Latur - 413517. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 29/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 04/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Aurangabad Arising Out Of Assessing Officer’S Order Section 272A(2)(K) R.W.S 200(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Also Called As ‘The Act’) Dated 26.11.2018. 2. The Only Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Levy Of Penalty U/S.272A(2)(K) Of The Act. The Assessing Officer Vide Order Dated 05/02/2014 Levied Penalty U/S.272A(2)(K) Of The Act For Delay In Filling Quarterly Statements Of Tax Deducted At Source (Tds) U/S.200(3) Of The Act.

Section 192Section 198Section 199Section 200Section 200(3)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

M/S. State Bank of Hyderabad, Nanded vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, TDS Range, Nashik

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

ITA 2974/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2974/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. State Bank Of Vs. Joint Cit, Tds Range, Hyderabad, Nashik. At Shrinagar, Nanded- 431602. Tan : Nskso8336G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Aurangabad Dated 23.10.2017 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Honorable Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs.2,11,100/- U/S 272(A)2(K) Of The I.T. Act, 1961. Penalty May Please Be Cancelled. 2. Appellant Prays For Just & Equitable Relief. 3. Appellant Prays To Add, Alter, Amend And/Or Withdraw The Ground/S During The Proceedings.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani

Section 200(3)Section 272Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

Sachit Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Gorakhpur vs. JCIT, TDS, Allahabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 62/VNS/2019[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi27 May 2022AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 272A(2)(k)

Sachit Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Gorakhpur vs. JCIT, TDS, Allahabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 95/VNS/2019[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 272A(2)(k)

Sachit Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Gorakhpur vs. JCIT, TDS, Allahabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 94/VNS/2019[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 272A(2)(k)

Sachit Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Gorakhpur vs. JCIT, TDS, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed being withdrawn as the tax dispute is settled under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020

ITA 64/VNS/2019[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi26 May 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Vijay Pal Rao & Hon’Ble Sh. Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2010-11 Sachit Hospital Pvt. Ltd., V. Joint Commissioner Of Income 271C Opposite Bismil Park, Civil Tax (Tds), Allahabad Range, Lines, Gorakhpur, U.P. Allahabad Pan-Aahcs3945G Tan-Alds02773D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.05.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.05.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR

Section 272A(2)(k)