PCIT v. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel

457 ITR 368High Court2023#11670 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 151Section 153ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

bogus long term capital gainsection 151(1)material facts necessary for assessmentbogus ltcglive linkmere change of opinionkelvinatorsection 10(38)penny stockborrowed satisfactionamalgamationentry operator

Judgments citing PCIT v. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel

Vaneet Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-14(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 2607/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69ASection 69C

…were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence that assessee had paid cash in return of receipt through cheque Tribunal rightly deleted addition holding that transactions were genuine. Pr. CIT v. Sandipkumar Parsottambhai Patel (2023) 457 ITR 368 (Guj.) 6) Where AO disallowed loss claimed by assessee on sale of shares on ground that assessee traded in shares of penny stock and claimed bogus loss, since shares were purchased online and payments were made through banking channel and AO had no evidence to show that there was an agreement between assessee and any other party to convert unacc…

Hetal Daxesh Shah, Mumbai vs. A. C. of Income Tax 19 (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 176/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…(2024) 463 ITR 711, Hon’ble Bombay High Court decision in case of Asha Gupta V. ITO 173 taxmann.com 834, Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of PCIT V. Gaurav Bagaria 453 ITR 513, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of PCIT V. Sandipkumar Parsottambhai Patel 457 ITR 368 and Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of CCIT V. Nilesh Jain 163 taxmann.com 229. ITA No. 176/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2012-13 9 9. In light of the aforesaid submission, it was submitted that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s. 68 be directed to be deleted and consequentially the addition made u/s. 69C be also directed…

Jaibhagwan Banarasidas Jindal, Jalna vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jalna

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

ITA 2016/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2016-17 Jaibhagwan Banarasidas Jindal ITO, Ward-1, Jalna 29, New Mondha, Bus Stand, Jalna HO, Vs. Jalna – 431203 PAN: AAQPJ5374E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 06-01-2025 Date of pronouncement : 27-02-2025 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 02.08.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assess…

Amar Kasera (HUF), Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, Patna

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 183/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

…2015-16 aforesaid reasons, no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises from order of Tribunal requiring consideration by this Court - Held, yes [Paras 13 and 14] [In favour of assessee]” iii) PCIT Vs. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel 457 ITR 368 (Gujarat) 07/03/2023 “Where Assessing Officer treated transactions in purchase and sale of share as sham transactions and sale proceeds of shares were treated as undisclosed income under section 68, since payments were received through account payee cheques and transactions were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence t…

Amar Kasera (HUF), Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, Patna

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 182/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

…2015-16 aforesaid reasons, no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises from order of Tribunal requiring consideration by this Court - Held, yes [Paras 13 and 14] [In favour of assessee]” iii) PCIT Vs. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel 457 ITR 368 (Gujarat) 07/03/2023 “Where Assessing Officer treated transactions in purchase and sale of share as sham transactions and sale proceeds of shares were treated as undisclosed income under section 68, since payments were received through account payee cheques and transactions were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence t…

Amar Kasera (HUF), Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, Patna

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 181/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

…2015-16 aforesaid reasons, no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises from order of Tribunal requiring consideration by this Court - Held, yes [Paras 13 and 14] [In favour of assessee]” iii) PCIT Vs. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel 457 ITR 368 (Gujarat) 07/03/2023 “Where Assessing Officer treated transactions in purchase and sale of share as sham transactions and sale proceeds of shares were treated as undisclosed income under section 68, since payments were received through account payee cheques and transactions were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence t…

Amar Kasera (HUF), Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, Patna

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 180/PAT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

…2015-16 aforesaid reasons, no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises from order of Tribunal requiring consideration by this Court - Held, yes [Paras 13 and 14] [In favour of assessee]” iii) PCIT Vs. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel 457 ITR 368 (Gujarat) 07/03/2023 “Where Assessing Officer treated transactions in purchase and sale of share as sham transactions and sale proceeds of shares were treated as undisclosed income under section 68, since payments were received through account payee cheques and transactions were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence t…

Amar Kasera (HUF), Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-1, Patna

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 179/PAT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Jan 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 250

…2015-16 aforesaid reasons, no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises from order of Tribunal requiring consideration by this Court - Held, yes [Paras 13 and 14] [In favour of assessee]” iii) PCIT Vs. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel 457 ITR 368 (Gujarat) 07/03/2023 “Where Assessing Officer treated transactions in purchase and sale of share as sham transactions and sale proceeds of shares were treated as undisclosed income under section 68, since payments were received through account payee cheques and transactions were done through recognized stock exchange, and there was no evidence t…

Puneet Singh R. Bhadouria, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(9), Vadodara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 334/AHD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

…, it was suspended in the year 2015 but the assessee has sold these shares on 04.07.20113 which is prior to the suspension of trading of the said shares. The Ld. AR relied upon the various decisions which are as follows :- 1 Sandipkumar Parshottambhai Patel, 457 ITR 368 2 Genuine Finance Pvt. Ltd, 152 taxmann.com 330 3 Swati Luthra, 6480/Del/2017, Delhi 4. Simi Verma, 3387/Del/2018, Delhi 5. Hakimuddin Khambati, 288/Ind2019, Indore 6. Radheyshyam Khandelwal, 7/Ind/2019, Indore 7. Ridhi Bagaria, 76/CTK/2023, Cuttack 8. Priyanka Agrawal, 406/PAN/2018, Panaji 9. Parasben Kasturchand Kochar, 204 of 2020, Gujarat 10…

PCIT v. Sandip Kumar Parsottambhai Patel (457 ITR 368) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax