CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur

357 ITR 638Reported decision2013#1243 most cited

What is CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur authority for?

The benefit of Section 10(38) for long-term capital gains is not available when transactions in penny stocks are found to be part of a scheme involving price manipulation or accommodation entries, indicating the gains are not genuine and lack actual investment.

91

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur · 357 ITR 638 · Section 10(38) · Section 68 · bogus long term capital gain · penny stock transactions · accommodation entry · price manipulation · genuineness of transactions · onus of proof · capital gains exemption · colourable device

Also reported as

37 Taxmann.com 286

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69CSection 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 37

Issues it is cited on

onus of proofcircular tradingcolourable devicebogus ltcgpaper companybogus long term capital gainpenny stocksection 10(38)entry operatorlong term capital gainslong term capital gainaccommodation entry

Judgments citing CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. VIJETA LODHA, JAIPUR

ITA 390/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, C.A. (through V.C.)For Respondent: None
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…ated\n03.08.2016.\nDisha N Lalwani v. ITO in ITA No. 6398 | Mum 12012, order dated\n22.03.2017.\nITO v. Shamim. M Bharwoni [2016] 69 taxmann.com 65.\nUsha Chandresh Shah v. ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated\n26.09.2014.\nCIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638.\n12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon'ble High Court are squarely\napplicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and\ncircumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of\nmajor scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the\njudgments quoted above,…

KARUNA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 2(1), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 190/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT, Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 250Section 250(6)

…03.08.2016. ♦ Disha N Lalwani v. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I2012, order dated 22.03.2017. ♦ ITO v. Shamim. M Bharwoni [2016] 69 taxmann.com 65. ♦ Usha Chandresh Shah v. ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. ♦ CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we, h…

CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 66/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar, Joint CIT, Ld
Section 10(38)Section 139(4)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 37Section 69C

…03.08.2016. ♦ Disha N Lalwani v. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I2012, order dated 22.03.2017. ♦ ITO v. Shamim. M Bharwoni [2016] 69 taxmann.com 65. ♦ Usha Chandresh Shah v. ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. ♦ CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we, h…

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri P.K. Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: \nDr. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

…TA No. 550/Chd/2008 dated 26.9.2013 Chandigarh\ne) Napar Drugs Ltd. 98 ITD 265, Delhi\nf) Dinesh Kumar Khandelwal HUF Vs. ITO ITA No. 58/Nag/2015 dated\n24.8.2016 Ratnakar M. Pujari Vs. ITO 9951/Mum/2012 dted 3.8.2016\nIn the case of CIT(A) Vs. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638 also, Hon'ble Gauhati\nHigh Court has held that price manipulations of penny stocks analysed by\nAO was on correct footing and held that assessee was not eligible for\nLTCG u/s.10(38) of the Act.\n6.45 We now intend to examine several case laws which are cited by the\nparties before this Tribunal, before we part with this adjudication and\nadjudg…

KAUSHIK CHANDRAVADAN PARIKH,MUMBAI vs. NFAC, DELHI

ITA 2064/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 68

…. 550/Chd/2008 dated 26.9.2013 Chandigarh e) Napar Drugs Ltd. 98 ITD 265, Delhi f) Dinesh Kumar Khandelwal HUF Vs. ITO ITA No. 58/Nag/2015 dated 24.8.2016 h) Ratnakar M. Pujari Vs. ITO 9951/Mum/2012 dted 3.8.2016 (22) In the case of CIT(A) Vs. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638 also, Hon'ble Gauhati High Court has held that price manipulations of penny stocks 24 Kaushik Chandravadan Parikh analysed by AO was on correct footing and held that assessee was not eligible for LTCG u/s. 10(38) of the Act. 15. To sum up, the addition made by Ld. AO, is confirmed and the claim of assessee LTCG u/s. 10(38) was denied because o…

SACHIN KANODIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 42(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 9504/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 68Section 69C

…Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. 33 Sachin Kanodia Vs. ITO CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

SHANKAR LAL AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 150/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, ARFor Respondent: Ms. P. Sumitha, DR
Section 10(38)

…TO in ITA No. 6389/Mum/2012, order dated 22-3-2017. ITO v. Shamin M. Bharwani MANU/IU/0493/2015: [2016] 69 Page 24 of 27 taxmann.com 65. Usha Chandresh Shah v. ITO in ITA No. 6858/Mum/2011, order dated 26-9-2014, CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur MANU/GH/0241/2013: 357 ITR 638 Facts as well as rationale given by Hon'ble High Court are squarely applicable to case before us. Hence, keeping in view overall facts and circumstances of case that profits earned by assessee are part of major scheme of accommodation entries and keeping in view ratio of judgments quoted above, we, hereby decline to interfere in order of ld. CIT(…

ANIRUDH VENKATA RAGI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 352/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

…N. Lalwani v. ITO in ITA No. 6389/Mum/2012, order dated 22-3-2017. ITO v. Shamin M. Bharwani MANU/IU/0493/2015: [2016] 69 taxmann.com 65. Usha Chandresh Shah v. ITO in ITA No. 6858/Mum/2011, order dated 26-9-2014, CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur MANU/GH/0241/2013: 357 ITR 638 Facts as well as rationale given by Hon'ble High Court are squarely applicable to case before us. Hence, keeping in view overall facts and circumstances of case that profits earned by assessee are part of major scheme of accommodation entries and keeping in view ratio of judgments quoted above, we, hereby decline to interfere in order of ld. CIT(…

POORNIMA RAMESH SHENOY,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-30(2)(5) (PRESENTLY WARD 41(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar NairFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…12, order dated 03.08.2016 >Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398/Mum/2012, order dated 22.03.2017 >ITO vs. Shamim M. Bharwoni [2016] 69 taxmann.com 65 >UshaChandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858/Mum/2011, order dated 26.09.2014 >CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 5.6....... 5.7....... 5.8 So, the irresistible conclusion in this case is meticulous paper work by the appellant in making investment in unknown stock and then selling the same as per convenience of the broker and entry operator by rigging prices at astronomical rate shows that the AO has been compelled to examine the entire transactions in the…

RASHI AGRAWAL,CUTTACKI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed

ITA 56/CTK/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack04 May 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Keshav Dubey, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)

…axmann.com 196 (Bom), Udit Kalra v. ITO ITA no. 220/2019 (Del) dt. of order 08/03/2019] whereas in cases decided by ITAT in favour of assesses, High Courts have remanded theses to tribunals for adjudication in accordance with law [Jasvinder Kaur v. CIT (2013) 37 Taxmann.com 286 (Guwahati)] or dismissed assessees‟s appeals [Chandan Gupta v. CIT (2015) 54 Taxmann.com 10 (P & H)]. Sovesh C. Mohanty, IRS Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT)-1, Cuttack, DR. 5. Ld.Sr. DR has relied upon the various decisions and also submitted the copies of the same. Ld. Sr. DR has specifically relied on the decision of the Hon’ble…

HARISH SHARMA HUF,B-1, PATODIYA MARG, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 318/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Nov 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Chanchal Meena (JCIT)
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…ani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6389/Mum/2012, order dated 22.03.2017. ITO vs. Shamin M. Bharwani MANU/1U/0493/2015: [2016] 69 taxmann.com 65. Usha Chandresh Shah vs. ITO in ITA No. 6858/Mum/2011, order {dated 26.09.2014, CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur MANU/GH/0241/2013: 357 ITR 638 Facts as well as rationale given by Hon'ble High Court are squarely applicable to case before us. Hence, keeping in view overall facts and circumstances of case that profits earned by assessee are part of major scheme of accommodation entries and keeping in view ratio of judgments quoted above, we, hereby decline to interfere in order of ld. CIT…

SITA DEVI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD-4(1), JAIPUR

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

ITA 56/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri C.M. Batwara, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…ated 03. 08. 2016 > Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398/Mum/2012, order dated 22.03.2017. >ITO vs Shamim M. Bharwoni [2016] 69 taxmann. com 65. > Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858/Mum/2011, order dated 26. 09. 2014. > CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we, he…

ACIT, C.C. -4, JAIPUR vs. MAVERICK COMMODITY BROKERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 27/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 165/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 164/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT, CC-4, , JAIPUR vs. SHRI ANSHUL JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 163/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena (Pr.CIT)
Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 162/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 161/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 160/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

ITA 159/JPR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

….08.2016. " Disha N. Lalwani vs. ITO in ITA No. 6398 I Mum I 2012, order dated 22.03.2017. " ITO vs. Shamim. M Bharwoni [20 16] 69 taxmann.com 65. " Usha Chandresh Shah Vs ITO in ITA No. 6858 I Mum I 2011, order dated 26.09.2014. " CIT vs. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur 357 ITR 638. 12. The facts as well as rationale given by the Hon 'ble High Court are squarely applicable to the case before us. Hence, keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the case that the profits earned by the assessee are a part of major scheme of the accommodation entries and keeping in view the ratio of the judgments quoted above, we,…

Showing 1–20 of 91 · Page 1 of 5

CIT v. Smt. Jasvinder Kaur (357 ITR 638) — Cited in 91 Judgments | BharatTax