SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA (HUF),LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee's shifting explanations and failure to substantiate them demonstrated a lack of bona fides. Consequently, the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was confirmed.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed to be an entry operator, providing accommodation entries. However, the assessee provided inconsistent explanations regarding the source of cash, shifting from accommodation entries to commodity trading and then back to accommodation entries with commission earnings.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee's inconsistent explanations regarding the source of cash constitute concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars, warranting penalty under Section 271(1)(c).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी िवजय वमा" , लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIJAY VARMA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 588, 589 & 592 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10 Sudhir Kumar Sharma बनाम The ITO 70- New Lajpat Nagar, Ludhiana Ward 6(1), Ludhiana Punjab-141002 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ADBPS0503N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 587, 590 & 591 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10 Sudhir Kumar Sharma (HUF) बनाम The ITO 70- New Lajpat Nagar, Ludhiana Ward 6(1), Ludhiana Punjab-141002 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAKHS0128R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Kuldeep Singh, Advocate and Shri MPS Malhotra, ITP (Virtual Mode) राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Pr. CIT, DR and Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13/08/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 24/08/2026 आदेश/Order PER VIJAY VARMA, A.M: All the above appeals have been filed by the Appellant aga
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2370/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Hetal Vinodchandra Sheth, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2369/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026