What is the leading case on Section 274(2) of the Income Tax Act?

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) v. IKEA Trading Hong Kong Ltd. (333 ITR 565) is the decision most relied on for Section 274(2), cited in 34 judgments. The date of issuance of a Show Cause Notice (SCN) for penalty is the relevant starting point for calculating the limitation period for passing penalty orders.

Which cases are most cited on Section 274(2)?

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) v. IKEA Trading Hong Kong Ltd. (333 ITR 565) — 34 citing judgments; PCIT v. Rishikesh Buildcon (P.) Ltd. (147 Taxmann.com 220) — 27 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 274(2)?

BharatTax indexes 42 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 274(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 274(2) of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.471

Section 274(2) falls under section 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which corresponds to section 471 (Procedure) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 471 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 274(2) is Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) v. IKEA Trading Hong Kong Ltd. (333 ITR 565), cited in 34 of the 42 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 274(2)

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) v. IKEA Trading Hong Kong Ltd.

333 ITR 565 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

The date of issuance of a Show Cause Notice (SCN) for penalty is the relevant starting point for calculating the limitation period for passing penalty orders.

PCIT v. Rishikesh Buildcon (P.) Ltd.

147 Taxmann.com 220 · 2023 · High Court

citing judgments

Appeals related to statutory limitation periods for penalty proceedings are decided by considering relevant High Court judgments.

Judgments on Section 274(2)

Ab Knowledge Systems, Pune vs. DCIT, Pune

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

ITA 92/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Sept 2026AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri B. D. Bhide &For Respondent: Shri Mithun Shete

Section 10ASection 115JSection 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(6)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)Section 274

Sundaram Home Finance Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward-6(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1996/CHNY/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Sept 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Ss Viswanethra Raviिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sundaram Home Finance Ltd, Income Tax Officer, 5Th Floor, Sundaram Towers, Corporate Ward-6(1), No.46, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai. Vs. Chennai – 600014 अपीलाथ" Appellant ""थ" Respondent Aadcs4826J Permanent Account Number Of Assessee: अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant Represented By: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan- Advocate ""थ" "ारा/Respondent Represented By: Mr.Madhan Kumar – Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing: 30.07.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 23.09.2026 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Dated 03.02.2026 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Confirming The Levy Of Penalty Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Act Is Contrary To Law, Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Therefore Liable To Be Set Aside.

Section 14ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)

Hemang H Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 27(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1395/MUM/2026[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: AABPD2752R

Section 147Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)Section 69C

Nandlal Madhavji Thakkar, Mulund Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax 29 2 Mumbai, Bandra East Mumbai

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

ITA 1610/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Jagadishassessment Year : 2013-14

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)Section 275

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Borgwarner Morse Tec Llc, Us

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITITA 5/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhit(It)A No. - 5/Del/2025 [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Acit, Cirlce 1(1)(2) Intl Taxation, Borgwarner Morse Tec Llc, Room No 509, D Block, Civic 3850 Hamlin Road Auburn Hills, Centre, New Delhi-110002 Vs Mi, 48326, Us, Usa-999999 Pan-Aaecb7930M Revenue Assessee

Section 112(1)(c)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

As Trading Company, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 6928/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Sh. Prateek Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 274(2)

Sheikh Zakariya Educational & Welfare Trust, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Ward, Bareilly, Cr Building

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

ITA 659/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2015-16 Sheikh Zakariya Educational V. Commissioner Of Income & Welfare Trust Tax, Exemption Ward, A-23, Transport Nagar, Bareilly Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh- Cr Building, Kamla 244001, Moradabad. Nehru Marg, Civil Lines- Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aalts8534L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms. Aditi Garg, Ca Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16 03 2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 04 2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Aditi Garg, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT (DR)

Section 147Section 271Section 274(2)Section 69A

Sunil Bansal, Arera Colony vs. AO Central Circle-1, Hoshangabad Road

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

ITA 768/IND/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisunil Bansal Ao Central Circle- बनाम/ E-2/88 Arera Colony, Bhopal 1 Vs. (Pan:Abcpg1186A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Anil Khabya, Ca Revenue By Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 07.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.04.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 139Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)Section 698

Ujjain Sahakari Dugdh Sangh Maryadit, Ujjain vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1) Ujjain, Ujjain

Appeal is allowed

ITA 154/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2020-21 Ujjain Dugdh Sangh (Sah) Dcit/Acit-1(1) Maryadit, Ujjain 1 Dairy Plant, Maxi Road, बनाम/ Naulakha Bid, Vs. Ujjain (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaaau0051C Assessee By Ms. Nupur Ladha, Shri Vaibhav Siroliya & Shri V.K. Ladha, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27/02/2026

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274(2)Section 80P

Ashutosh Dubey, Kanjurmarg vs. DCIT Circle-8, Pune

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

ITA 2215/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2215/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Ashutosh Dubey, V Income Tax Officer, Tower 8, Flat No.3201, Runwal S Circle-8, Pune. Forest, Lbs Road, Kanjurmarg West, Maharashtra – 400078 Pan: Ajppd0173M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Amar Pandey (Virtual) Revenue By Smt Neha Thakur (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18/02/2026

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 270ASection 274(2)Section 5

Sandeep Kumar Sethia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 44(2), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 584/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 250Section 269SSection 271D

Raghuram Hume Pipes Private Limited, Guntur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Guntur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 233/VIZ/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shrik Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A.233/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2016-17) Raghuram Hume Pipes Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Guntur-522002. Income Tax, Pan: Aaccr6125N Circle-2(1), Guntur. (अपीलधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ca प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)

Mr. Naresh Topandas Aidasani, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi/ DCIT-27(2), Vashi, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the above terms

ITA 105/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)

Vaibhav Pankaj Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 25(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1022/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble& Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year 2013-14 Vaibhav Pankaj Shah, 60-B, Dolat Bunglow, East West Road No.2, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai 400 049 Pan:Aalps-8652-B - Appellant Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 25(3), Mumbai, Room No.232, 2Nd Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400 051 - Respondent- Appellant By : Shri Devendra Jain Respondent By : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon Date Of Hearing : 04/06/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/06/2024

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274(2)Section 35(1)(iii)

Invest Smart India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 331/HYD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 331/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Invest Smart India (P) Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 2(1) Pan:Aftpg1095F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri N. Raja Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22/02/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.04.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2013-14. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) Nfac In Confirming The Penalty Of Rs.30,000/- Levied By The Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(B) Of The I.T. Act. 3. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company & Did Not File Its Return Of Income Nor

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri N. Raja Kumar, DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 274Section 68

Vivek Kumar Singh, Rewa vs. ITO Ward Singrauli, Singrauli

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

ITA 54/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevivek Kumar Singh, Vs. Ito, 14/357, Sanjay Nagar Singrauli, Rewa-486001, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 2Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 274(2)Section 3