“bogus LTCG”

ITO - 33(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Smt Ranjana Subhash Shinde, Mumbai

In the result , the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC‘ BENCH MUMBAI SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO- 33(1)(1) Vs. SMT. RANJANA

Dy.C.I.T. Cent. Cir-6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Dilip B.Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objections for AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14

transactions in the shares of AWs Radford Global Ltd. are bogus and managed transactions and these shares have been utilized to provide entry of bogus LTCG. The fact that the shares of Radford Global Limited have been managed has also been confirmed by the SEBI order and based ... shares of M/s Shree Shaleen Textiles Limited are bogus and managed transactions and these shares have been utilized to provide entry of bogus LTCG. In light of the above you are required to explain as to why the transactions in the shares of Shree Shaleen Textiles Limited made by Shri

Nishith Rameshchandra Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(2)(6), Mumbai

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

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Nishith

ACIT -6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Clothing Culture Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: This Tribunal By The Revenue During The Covid Period. Hence, In View Of The Relaxation Granted By The Hon’Ble Supreme Court, The Delay Of 123 Days Is Hereby Condoned & Appeal Of The Revenue Is Admitted For Adjudication.

transactions in shares of ACEL. The ld. AO also noted that the shares of ACEL have been used for providing accommodation entry of bogus LTCG / STCG to various beneficieries. The ld. AO also stated that this fact has been confirmed in statements of Shri Rajkumar and Shri Suresh Jajodia (entry ... Shri Parag Dharamshi Sheth, it is seen that they have acted as ext providers for purchasing the shares of ACEL, sold by beneficiaries of bogus LTCG entry There is no mention of the name of appellant company as a beneficiary in any of these statements. 4.12 AO has listed certain

Ashok Jasraj Jain, HUF, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ashok Jasraj Jain, Huf, Acit-19(1), 45/12, Rajkotwala Bldg., 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir Bldg., 1St Carpenter Street, C.P. Tank, Vs. Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai-400 007. Pan No. Aaahj 0191 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mehul Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Sinha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

proved that a scheme was hatched by various players to obtain/provide obtain/provide obtain/provide accommodation accommodation accommodation entry entry entry of of of bogus bogus bogus LTCG LTCG LTCG through through through manipulation of stock market. Various syndicates had arranged manipulation of stock market. Various syndicates had arranged manipulation of stock ... penny revealed that the trading in shares of penny stock companies was a stock companies was a manipulated affair to generate entries of bogus LTCG to convert manipulated affair to generate entries of bogus LTCG to convert manipulated affair to generate entries of bogus LTCG to convert undisclosed income into

Income Tax Officer 33(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Dheeraj Babulal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4272/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 4092/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16) बिधम/ Ito-33(1)(4) Dheeraj Babulal Shah Room No. 708, 7Th Floor, 23/A-12, Akash Chsl, Vs. Bldg. No. C-12, Jalawal Nagar, Ashok Nagar, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Kandivali (E), Mumbai- Bandra Kurla Complex, 400101. Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Arwps1458D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. Ar) Assessee By: Shri Rajkumar Singh सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 19/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-45, Mumbai, Dated 29.03.2018 For A.Y.2014-15 & Dated 12.03.2019 For Ay. 2015-16 Respectively.

assessee was factually distinguishable from that of the general cases flagged by the Investigation Wing who were purportedly found to be beneficiaries of bogus LTCG. The relevant findings of the Ld. CIT(A) were as follows: “6.5 In the assessment order, while making additions, the ld. AO had relied ... shares, or that he gave cash to any of them which they deposited in the bank accounts and accommodated the appellant for getting the bogus LTCG. Thus, the inference drawn by the Id. AO on the basis of the said report and statements recorded by him cannot be considered

Shradha Estate Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3) (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shrikuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalshradha Estate Pvt. Ltd., 3, New Bake Bihari Building, 24Th Road, Khar (West), Opp. Khar Tel Ex, Mumbai-40052. Pan: Aabcs4961J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-5(3)(2), Room No. 583, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Sh. Ashish Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

S.R.K. Industries Ltd, Rutron International Ltd, Radford Global Ltd, Dhenu Buildcon and Pranax Lab and Sunrise Asian Ltd, are penny stocks company for bogus LTCG entries and STCL. v)During the assessment proceedings a show cause was issued to the signatory director of the assessee company and further a summon

Smt. Nayna I. Mantri, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-30, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br& Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesmt. Nayna I. Mantri, Vs. Principal Commissioner 1601, Daffodil Tower, Of Income Tax-30, Nr. Chinchpoli Fatak, 540, 5Th Flr. Kautilya S.V. Road, Malad West, Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, Mumbai-400064 G Block, Bkc, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 Pan No.Aaopm2589C Appellant Respondent

shares of Karma Industries Ltd and as per the ITS reports, available on the ITD system, the assessee is one of the beneficiary of bogus LTCG. Therefore, the Assessing Officer (A.O.) has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and notice under Section

DCIT - CC- 6(4), Mumbai vs. Shri. Narendra Gehlaut, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1429/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-6(4) बिधम/ Shri Narendra Gehlaut Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, 875, Sector-17B, Vs. Air India Building, Nariman Gurugram, Haryana- Point, Mumbai-400021. 122001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aazpg9630K (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopal Revenue By: Shri Mahesh Akhade (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-54, Mumbai Dated 21.10.2021 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Are As Under: - “(1) Whether, On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Additions / Disallowances Made In The Assessment Order Is Not Sustainable As They Are Without Reference To Any Incriminating Material Found During The Search, Without Appreciating That The Department Has Filed An Slp Against The Decision Of The Hon'Ble High Court Of Bombay In The Case Of Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Limited Reported In 374 Itr 645 (Bom), Which Has Been Admitted & Directed To Be Listed By The Hon'Ble Supreme Court Of India, Vide Order Dated 12.10.2015 Reported In [2015] 64 Taxmann.Com 34 (Sc) ?”

circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the facts of the case and allowing the bogus LTCG of Rs.8,33,30,000/-.” (4) “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred ... case and allowing the claim of Capital loss of Rs. 10,80,00,000/- on account of forfeiture of share warrants, claimed against the bogus LTCG of Rs.8,32,80,000/-” (5) The appellant craves to leave, to add, to amend and / or to alter any of the ground

Heena Suresh Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Blesuresh M. Jain Huf V. Ito-19(3)(4), 52A Nanu Bhai Desai Road 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007 Mulji Thakersi Building 2Nd Floor, Mumbai-400004 Pan: Aalhs7460R (Appellant) (Respondent) Heena Suresh Jain V.

decision in the matter or the general observations based on statements, probabilities, human behavior and discovery of the modus operandi adopted in earning alleged bogus LTCG and STCG, that have surfaced during investigations, should guide the authorities in arriving at a conclusion as to whether the claim in genuine ... NO.6614 & 6617/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) Suresh M. Jain HUF & others 19. On similar facts where the revenue has alleged that the assessee has declared bogus LTCG, it was held as follows: a) The CALCUTTA HIGH COURT in the case of BLB CABLES & CONDUCTORS [ITA No. 78 of 2017] dated

Suresh M Jain HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO 19 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Blesuresh M. Jain Huf V. Ito-19(3)(4), 52A Nanu Bhai Desai Road 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400007 Mulji Thakersi Building 2Nd Floor, Mumbai-400004 Pan: Aalhs7460R (Appellant) (Respondent) Heena Suresh Jain V.

decision in the matter or the general observations based on statements, probabilities, human behavior and discovery of the modus operandi adopted in earning alleged bogus LTCG and STCG, that have surfaced during investigations, should guide the authorities in arriving at a conclusion as to whether the claim in genuine ... NO.6614 & 6617/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) Suresh M. Jain HUF & others 19. On similar facts where the revenue has alleged that the assessee has declared bogus LTCG, it was held as follows: a) The CALCUTTA HIGH COURT in the case of BLB CABLES & CONDUCTORS [ITA No. 78 of 2017] dated

Surplus Finvest P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-11, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL

DCIT Cent. Cir 5(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Parth Vinod Gadhiya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in respect of A

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

perverse. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of bogus LTCG exemption claim arising out of the transactions in penny stocks Comfort Fincap and Sunrise Asian, ignoring the incriminating finding regarding 32000% rise

Barkha Ramesh Merchant, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Blebarkha Ramesh Merchant V. Acit – 16(1) 110/111, Crescent Mansion Room No. 439 Gamdevi Lane, Gamdevi Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai-400007 M.K. Road Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Afnpm4225P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chintan Patel Department By : Shri Dilipkumar Shah

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI