“bogus LTCG”

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax - 7(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai vs. Nisha Shantaram Pokle, Mumbai

Soumen Sen/(D.B & Co.) who all accepted their role in the entire scheme of providing accommodation entry in the form of bogus LTCG. Thereafter, the AO concluded that the entire LTCG claim of assessee was bogus, and such an act was resorted to by assessee for converting her black money ... Soumen Sen/(D.B & Co.) who all accepted their role in the entire scheme of providing accommodation entry in the form of bogus LTCG. Thereafter, he concluded that the purchase and sale of share of M/s. Marigold (now known as M/s. Greencrest Financial Services Ltd) was nothing but accommodation entry provided

Ajay Shankarlal Bankda, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 16(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2484/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ajay Shankarlal Bankda बिधम/ Dcit, Circle-16(2) B Wing 4301, Db Woods, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Gokuldham, Goregaon East, Maharshi Karve Marg Mumbai-400063. Road, New Marine Lines, Churchagate, Mumbai- 400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpb2851J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Shri Anil Sant (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 21.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Rs.88,06,950/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata (General report) wherein it was reported that an organized racket involving entry operators were facilitating/generating accommodation entries to beneficiaries bogus LTCG which are claimed as exempt from tax. The AO took note of the modus operandi adopted by entry operators to facilitate beneficiaries bogus LTCG ... Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had passed some orders against some persons involved in manipulation of share market for providing accommodation entry of bogus LTCG and has passed several orders against the trading of such 3 A.Y. 2014-15 Ajay Shankarlal Bankda penny-stocks. According to the AO, the Investigation

Income Tax Officer-27(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sachin Velji Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

thus allowing deduction u/s 10(38) of the Act as well as deleting addition of Rs. 19,28,875/- as commission for arranging the bogus LTCG (5% of commission) u/s 69C of the Act. 4. Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and had filed his return ... DCIT Vs Mukesh R Marolia (6 SOT 247) wherein on similar facts and circumstances the addition made by the AO on account of purported bogus LTCG derived on purchase/sale of shares (off-market) was deleted by observing as under: “10. We heard both sides in detail and perused rival contentions

Reena Rakesh Kothari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, WD-26(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Reena Rakesh Kothari Income Tax Officer 28-A, Kamgar Nagar, Ward 26(2)(5), S.G. Barve Marg, Kautilya Bhavan, Vs. Kurla (East), Bandra, Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 024 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahlpk7422J Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Mahita Nair, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM Reena

Abhishek Tejraj Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleabhishek Tejraj Doshi V. Income Tax Officer 259, 2Nd Floor, Johari Mansion Jurisdiction Circle 19(1), Kalbadevi Road, Kalbadevi Mumbai, Mumbai Mumbai 400002 Pan: Aegpd9279J (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Anil Sathe Assessee Represented By : Department Represented By : Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

record and thus may kindly be deleted. 17. On the other hand, Ld DR objected to the above submissions and prayed that both the bogus LTCG and commissions paid on the same may be sustained. 18. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we already held that

Neeta Rajesh Lodha, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.408/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Neeta Rajesh Lodha बिधम/ Cit(Appeals)/Nfac 20/22, Shamseth Street, National Faceless Appeal, Vs. Zaveri Bazar, Mumbai- Centre (Nfac), Delhi. 400002. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abdpl8053A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 20.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.2,61,43,231/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act As Well As Upholding The Addition Of Rs.5,22,865/- As Commission (2% Of Sales Proceeds) For Arranging Bogus Ltcg U/S 69 Of The Act.

well as upholding the addition of Rs.5,22,865/- as commission (2% of Sales Proceeds) for arranging bogus LTCG u/s 69 of the Act. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and had filed her return of income on 29.02.2012 for Assessment Year 2011-12 declaring total ... assertions and observations, which according to him, is the manner and mode used by entry operators in active connivance with exit providers to accommodate bogus LTCG and losses in transactions of these penny scrips. The relevant facts concerning the assessee case, is noted by the AO from para

Mr Bhavesh Kantilal Kubadia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-21(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1490/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Mr. Bhavesh Kantilal बिधम/ Ito, Ward-21(1)(2) Kubadia Room No. 104, 1St Floor, Vs. 7, 2Nd Floor, Neminath Piramal Chamber, Building, S. K. Bole Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai- (Dadar (W), Mumbai- 400012. 400028. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Agrpk2377D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 24.04.2023 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Making An Addition Of Rs.77,02,597 U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act As Well As Upholding The Addition Of Rs.2,31,038/- As Commission (3% Of Ltcg) For Arranging Bogus Ltcg U/S 69 Of The Act.

exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act as well as upholding the addition of Rs.2,31,038/- as commission (3% of LTCG) for arranging bogus LTCG u/s 69 of the Act. 3. Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income ... assertions and observations, which according to him, is the manner and mode used by entry operators in active connivance with exit providers to accommodate bogus LTCG and losses in transactions of these penny scrips. The relevant facts concerning the assessee case, is noted by the AO from para

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.95/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 09.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.3,20,97,772/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

assertions and observations, which according to him, is the manner and mode used by entry operators in active connivance with exit providers to accommodate bogus LTCG and losses in transactions of these penny scrips. The relevant facts concerning the assessee case, is noted by the AO from para ... beneficiaries to facilitate laundering 14 A.Y. 2013-14 Sheetal Rupesh Savla their black money to white through pre-planned receipt in the form of bogus LTCG, loans etc. But the discussion of lower authorities, we find to be general in nature and there is nothing in the discussion to link/connect

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.94/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 07.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.73,11,760/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

unscrupulous entry operators had devised methods/modus-operandi to beneficiaries to facilitate laundering their black money to white through pre-planned receipt in the form of bogus LTCG, loans etc. But the discussion of lower authorities, we find to be general in nature and there is nothing in the discussion to link/connect ... Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.93/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 05.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Making An Addition Of Rs.3,17,12,750/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

assertions and observations, which according to him, is the manner and mode used by entry operators in active connivance with exit providers to accommodate bogus LTCG and losses in transactions of these penny scrips. The relevant facts concerning the assessee case, is noted by the AO from para ... unscrupulous entry operators had devised methods/modus-operandi to beneficiaries to facilitate laundering their black money to white through pre- planned receipt in the form of bogus LTCG, loans etc. But the discussion of lower authorities, we find to be general in nature and there is nothing in the discussion to link/connect

Pradipkumar Harakchand Doshi, Mumbai vs. The ITO, Ward-19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepradipkumar Harakchand Doshi V. Income Tax Officer – 19(2)(5) 94/100, 2Nd Floor Matru Mandir, Grant Road 2Nd Pathan Street Mumbai - 400007 Mumbai - 400004 Pan: Aahpd4722B (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Assessee Represented By : Department Represented By : Shri H.M. Bhatt

elaborately analysed various parameters with regard to claim of Bogus long term capital gain such as modus operandi to generate bogus LTCG, Misuse of exemption on Long Term Capital Gains tax for money laundering and findings and investigation of the Wing (for the sake of brevity the same ... Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction

Anoopkumar Devidas Raimalani, Mumbai vs. ITO, Cir-18(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

same may please be deleted. 10. Confirming addition of Rs. 4,69,320/- on account of so called commission payments for so called bogus LTCG entry of Rs. 1,17,33,011/- in absence of any evidences thereof and therefore, the addition made may plea se be deleted.” Page ... Page No. 27 ITA NO. 1653/MUM/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15) Anoopkumar Devidas Raimalani commission paid is taken at 4%. Thus, commission paid on the total bogus LTCG entry of Rs.1,17,33,011/- @4% i.e. Rs.4,69,320/- is added back u/s 69C as unexplained expenses as the books

Crosseas Capital Services Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT(Central)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Crosseas Capital Assistant Commissioenr Of Services P. Ltd., Income Tax (Central Suite 37, 5Th Floor, Circle)-2(4), Martin Burn House, Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, 1 Rn Mukherjee Road, Pratishtha Bhavan, Kolkata, Old Cgo Annexe, West Bengal - 700 001 Maharishi Karve Road, Pan: Aaccc5470H Mumbai – 400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina , A.R. & Shri Maneck Andhyarujina, Ar. Revenue By : Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : All These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19 &

being trading loss 15. During the course of assessment the AO stated that the scrip M/s. Tilak Venture Ltd. has been used to provide bogus LTCG to various beneficiaries. After perusal of the detail filed by the assessee the AO observed that the assessee has traded in the aforesaid scrip

Crosseas Capital Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Crosseas Capital Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Central-2(4), Mumba

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are hereby partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Assessment Year: 2018-19 M/S. Crosseas Capital Assistant Commissioenr Of Services P. Ltd., Income Tax (Central Suite 37, 5Th Floor, Circle)-2(4), Martin Burn House, Vs. 802, 8Th Floor, 1 Rn Mukherjee Road, Pratishtha Bhavan, Kolkata, Old Cgo Annexe, West Bengal - 700 001 Maharishi Karve Road, Pan: Aaccc5470H Mumbai – 400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Firoze B. Andhyarujina , A.R. & Shri Maneck Andhyarujina, Ar. Revenue By : Shri H.M. Bhatt, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : All These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Different Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19 &

being trading loss 15. During the course of assessment the AO stated that the scrip M/s. Tilak Venture Ltd. has been used to provide bogus LTCG to various beneficiaries. After perusal of the detail filed by the assessee the AO observed that the assessee has traded in the aforesaid scrip

Crosseas Capital Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Central -2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singh

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Shanno Mohammed Yusuf Warsi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-25(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

brokers as entry providers, the scrip of Essar India proved various brokers as entry providers, the scrip of Essar India Ltd. used for providing Bogus LTCG and cash trail in the case of Ltd. used for providing Bogus LTCG and cash trail in the case of Ltd. used for providing ... Bogus LTCG and cash trail in the case of paper companies. It is proved that the assessee had worked out paper companies. It is proved that the assessee had worked out paper companies. It is proved that the assessee had worked out an arrangement in which the shares were acquired

DCIT Central Circle -2(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Viral Saraf Mittal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 2(2) V. Viral Saraf Mittal Room No. 806, 8Th Floor 901/902, Capri Heights Old Cgo Annex Building Palli Hill, Bandra (W) M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Azbps0317C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sidharth Kothari Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

right from cash deposit account to the beneficiaries' account was unearthed. As a result of investigation many individuals who have taken such entry of bogus LTCG amounting to crores of rupees have been identified The result of the investigation in brief is as under: i) Many individuals throughout the country ... Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction