← All Phrases

“bogus LTCG”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 68806 judgments

The decision most relied on for bogus LTCG is PCIT v. Swati Bajaj (139 Taxmann.com 352), cited in 443 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on bogus LTCG

PCIT v. Swati Bajaj
139 Taxmann.com 352 · 2022 · High Court
443
citing judgments

Tax authorities are entitled to examine surrounding circumstances and apply the test of human probabilities to determine the genuineness of long-term capital gains arising from the sale of manipulated penny stock, even if prima facie documents appear to support the transaction.

ITO, 19(3) (4) Mumbai v. Shamim M Bharwani
69 Taxmann.com 65 · 2016 · Reported
142
citing judgments

Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) from penny stock transactions are liable to be treated as bogus and added back under Section 68 as unexplained cash credits, especially when evidence suggests the involvement of entry operators providing accommodation entries.

Mukesh R.Marolia v. Addl. CIT
6 SOT 247 · 2006 · ITAT
139
citing judgments

The department must substantiate its allegations of a bogus long term capital gain scheme; if not substantiated, the addition made by the Assessing Officer for purported bogus LTCG derived from the purchase/sale of shares cannot be sustained. An assessee's claim for long term capital gains exemption on share transactions should be allowed where documentation supports the transactions.

5. PCIT v. Paramount Communication (P.) Ltd. Delhi High Court
392 ITR 444 · 2017 · High Court
111
citing judgments

For valid initiation of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer must possess tangible material and apply independent mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment. Reassessment cannot be based on mere borrowed satisfaction or unverified information without proper scrutiny.

Suman Poddar v. ITO
423 ITR 480 · 2020 · High Court
84
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer's detailed findings regarding bogus long-term capital gains from penny stock transactions, established through objective examination of facts and circumstantial evidence, should not be overturned by appellate authorities without a thorough investigation or fresh inquiry.

CIT-I v. Maheshchandra G. Vakil
40 Taxmann.com 326 · 2013 · High Court
69
citing judgments

An Assessing Officer is not justified in treating capital gain from the sale of shares as unexplained cash credit when the assessee proves the genuineness of share transactions with contract notes, broker's bank statements, DMAT accounts, and stock exchange abstracts.

6. CIT v. Jasvinder Kaur
54 Taxmann.com 10 · 2015 · High Court
57
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must provide the assessee with contrary material if they dispute the genuineness of long-term capital gains claimed under section 10(38). The onus is on the revenue to prove the transaction is a colourable device.

PCIT v. Parasben Kasturchand Kochar
130 Taxmann.com 177 · 2021 · Supreme Court
56
citing judgments

An assessment or reassessment order is considered bad in law and without legal sanction if its completion is not in accordance with prescribed legal procedures or timelines.

Judgments citing bogus LTCG

Krishna Devi, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 38(3), New Delhi

ITA 6356/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6356/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Krishna Devi, Vs Income Tax Officer, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Ward-38(3), New Delhi-110085 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abrpd0875E Assessee By : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.01.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

25/06/2019 are bad in law in as much as addition of Rs 24,69,636/- (break up : addition u/s 68 on a/c of alleged bogus LTCG Rs. 23,52,034/- and addition u/s 68 Rs. 117,602 as unexplained expenditure being transaction expense read with section 115BBE) is made without ... without valid notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. ii) To delete the addition of Rs 24,69,636/- on a/c of alleged bogus LTCG. iii) To quash assessment order and Id CIT-A order for being passed in serious violation of audi altrem partem. 6 Krishan Devi

Abhinav Agarwal HUF, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3641/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3640/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Abhinav Agarwal, Vs Dcit, C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. Circle-1, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Meerut New Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afzpa5664E

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 68

time of hearing of the appeal. Humble Prayer: i) To delete the addition of Rs.103,46,835 on a/c of alleged bogus LTCG; ii) To quash assessment order and Id CIT-A order for being passed in serious violation of audi altrem partem iii) To hold section 68 elc. does ... volume of a ‘Penny stock’ would see the bell curve peak as one shown on the left. Snapshot of Basic modus of providing bogus LTCG 22. Merger of Unlisted companies with Listed Entity: This is the most preferred option for the persons willing to operate for the purpose of doing

Abhinav Agarwal, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3640/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3640/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Abhinav Agarwal, Vs Dcit, C/O Kapil Goel, Adv. Circle-1, F-26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, Meerut New Delhi-110085 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Afzpa5664E

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR
Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 68

time of hearing of the appeal. Humble Prayer: i) To delete the addition of Rs.103,46,835 on a/c of alleged bogus LTCG; ii) To quash assessment order and Id CIT-A order for being passed in serious violation of audi altrem partem iii) To hold section 68 elc. does ... volume of a ‘Penny stock’ would see the bell curve peak as one shown on the left. Snapshot of Basic modus of providing bogus LTCG 22. Merger of Unlisted companies with Listed Entity: This is the most preferred option for the persons willing to operate for the purpose of doing

Vijayshree Food Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 587/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15 Vijayshree Food Products P. Ltd., Vs. Acit, C/O Ravi Gupta, Advocate, Central Circle-30, E-6A, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaccv4721C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.09.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 28Th December, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-30, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Export Of Tobacco Products. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30Th September, 2014 Declaring The Loss Of Rs.18,78,467/-. The Return Was Processed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 26Th November, 2014 At The Returned Income. Subsequently, The Ao Reopened The Assessment As Per The Provisions Of Section 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 131(1)(d)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

same is not 11 correct. Referring to page number 78-79 of PB, question number 7 & 8, he submitted that Kansabati has provided bogus LTCG in that period and not bogus share capital to any one. Therefore the AO’s observations for a future transaction is wrong and contrary

Satish Sharma, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3084/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 3084/Del/2018 (A.Y 2015-16) (Through Video Conferencing) Vs Acit Satish Sharma N-10, Jangpura Extension, Central Circle-30 New Delhi New Delhi Abdps4074M (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. V. K. Tulsian, Ca Respondent By Sh. Jawed Akhter, Cit Dr

Section 127Section 132Section 68

through broker. The 5 investigation wing report nowhere stated that the script of CCL International is blacklisted. The observation of the Assessing Officer that bogus LTCG is done by purchasing shares in preferential allotment i.e. private placement appears to be incorrect as the assessee has made purchases of 13500 shares ... assessment order whether the script of M/s CCL International was involved in the issue of manipulation of share market for providing accommodation entry of bogus LTCG. Merely stating that CCL International is a penny stock without giving any details of the report of investigation wing, Kolkata in the assessment order

ACIT, Circle-8(1), New Delhi vs. Arihant Kumar Jain, New Delhi

ITA 5342/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Senior DR
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143Section 68

addition of Rs.2,77,46,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 for 2 ITA No.5342/Del./2018 the bogus LTCG claimed not eligible for exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act.” 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand ... Chairman & Managing Director and other Directors of M/s. Kappac Pharma Limited have got recorded their statement on oath that they have provided accommodation bogus LTCG. During investigation carried out by the Directorate of Income-tax (Inv.), Kolkata, statements of Shri Alok Harlalka, Shri Sanjay Vora, Shri Jai Kishan Poddar, Shri

Poonam Rani Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 381/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Parikshit Singh, Senior DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

rate of the defunct or ordinary companies having no worth at fabricated prices.” The assessee has conveniently adopted this system and earned the bogus LTCG. Consequently, AO rejected the plea of earning LTCG by the 4 ITA No.381/Del./2016 assessee and treated the entire sale consideration of Rs.30

Vinay Kumar Dhingra(HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-49(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6388/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 10(38)Section 68

genuine one. Therefore, it is being hold that the assessee has used a pre- arranged device in form of booking of Bogus LTCG ol amount Ks. 4 41,00,925/- during the relevant year to bring into books his unaccounted income in view of tire elaborate discussion made above

Smt. Mamta Nyati Dhamnod Distt. Dhar, Dhamnod vs. ITO Dhar, Dhar

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 488/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

refuted by any adverse findings or material which could demonstrate involvement of the assessee or collusion with so called accommodation entry providers to obtain bogus LTCG as so alleged by the authorities below. 24. We also find that while analyzing sale of shares of similar scrip of M/s Sunrise Asian ... 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

Ritu Mittal, Burhanpur vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

In the result, all grounds raised by the assessee(s) are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee in ITANo

ITA 435/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2015-16

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

able to lay hands on a report dated 13.04.2016 issued by Joint Director Investigation, Indore for the alleged group of concerns engaged in providing bogus LTCG by way of bringing the prices of the shares at abnormally high price which are much higher than the fair market value ... purchase and sale of shares are sham which cannot stand the test of human probability and also held that assessee is indulged in arranging bogus LTCG to claim exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act. 7. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. counsel for the assessee

Neelam Mittal, Burhanpur vs. ITO Burhanpur, Burhanpur

In the result, all grounds raised by the assessee(s) are allowed and appeals filed by the assessee in ITANo

ITA 434/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2015-16

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

able to lay hands on a report dated 13.04.2016 issued by Joint Director Investigation, Indore for the alleged group of concerns engaged in providing bogus LTCG by way of bringing the prices of the shares at abnormally high price which are much higher than the fair market value ... purchase and sale of shares are sham which cannot stand the test of human probability and also held that assessee is indulged in arranging bogus LTCG to claim exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act. 7. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Ld. counsel for the assessee

Smt. Manisha Agrawal, Indore vs. The ITO-4 (3), Indore

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 410/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 68

penny stocks, which sets out the modus 20 Hakumuddin Khambati & Anr ITA No.288 & 410/Ind/2019 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 ... No.288 & 410/Ind/2019 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 is bogus

Shri Hakimuddin Khambati, Indore vs. ITO-4(4) Range-4, Indore

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 288/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 68

penny stocks, which sets out the modus 20 Hakumuddin Khambati & Anr ITA No.288 & 410/Ind/2019 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 ... No.288 & 410/Ind/2019 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 is bogus

Smt. Shweta Agrawal, Indore vs. The ACIT 5(1), R-5, Indore

In the result ground raised on merit as well as legal ground raised for not

ITA 281/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

bogus transactions of providing accommodation entries to give benefit to various persons to convert their unaccounted cash into accounted money in the form of bogus LTCG. Ld. A.O also took statement of the assessee and came to the conclusion that the assessee had no knowledge about the company. He concluded ... However, Ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied and he confirmed the view taken by Ld. A.O observing that the assessee is indulged in arranging bogus LTCG, the appellant had made investment through the derecognised broker and have earned excessive return within a short span of time which is extremely unfair

M/S. Sanjay Onkarmal Agrawal HUF, Indore vs. The ITO-5(3) Range-5, Indore

In the result ground raised on merit as well as legal ground raised for not

ITA 279/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 234ASection 68

bogus transactions of providing accommodation entries to give benefit to various persons to convert their unaccounted cash into accounted money in the form of bogus LTCG. Ld. A.O also took statement of the assessee and came to the conclusion that the assessee had no knowledge about the company. He concluded ... However, Ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied and he confirmed the view taken by Ld. A.O observing that the assessee is indulged in arranging bogus LTCG, the appellant had made investment through the derecognised broker and have earned excessive return within a short span of time which is extremely unfair

Kumari Ayushi Nyati, Indore vs. ITO-5(5), Indore

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 203/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

refuted by any adverse findings or material which could demonstrate involvement of the assessee or collusion with so called accommodation entry providers to obtain bogus LTCG as so alleged by the authorities below. 24. We also find that while analyzing sale of shares of similar scrip of M/s Sunrise Asian ... 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

Shri Manoj Yadav, Indore vs. ACIT5(1), Indore

ITA 149/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Mis Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Shri Manoj Yadav Acit Circle 5(1) Gf-Shekhar Residency Indore बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Flat No.204, Vs. Sch, No.54 Indore (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aagpy5452J

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68

succeed. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the view of the Ld. Assessing Officer placing reliance on various decisions holding that the assessee had indulged into bogus LTCG by way of taking accommodation entry and had earned excessive return within a short span of period which is extremely unusual

Manish Kumar Radheshyam Nyati, Dhar vs. ITO, Dhar

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 705/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

refuted by any adverse findings or material which could demonstrate involvement of the assessee or collusion with so called accommodation entry providers to obtain bogus LTCG as so alleged by the authorities below. 24. We also find that while analyzing sale of shares of similar scrip of M/s Sunrise Asian ... 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

Vijay Radheshyam Nyati HUF, Dhar vs. ITO, Dhar

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 704/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

refuted by any adverse findings or material which could demonstrate involvement of the assessee or collusion with so called accommodation entry providers to obtain bogus LTCG as so alleged by the authorities below. 24. We also find that while analyzing sale of shares of similar scrip of M/s Sunrise Asian ... 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

Smt Vijaya Nyati, Dhar vs. ITO, Dhar

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 703/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

refuted by any adverse findings or material which could demonstrate involvement of the assessee or collusion with so called accommodation entry providers to obtain bogus LTCG as so alleged by the authorities below. 24. We also find that while analyzing sale of shares of similar scrip of M/s Sunrise Asian ... 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