“price rigging”

Rehana Anwar Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Assessing Authority, Delhi

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

shares. The Tribunal has also come to a finding that there is no allegation against the assessee that it has participated in any price rigging in the market on the shares of RFL. 3. Therefore we find nothing perverse in the order of the Tribunal. 4. Mr. Walve placed reliance ... supra) and Ziauddin A Siddique (supra) shall apply in the present case, since the AO has not established that the assessee was involved in price rigging and further the AO did not find fault with any of the documents furnished by the assessee. 16. We noticed earlier that

Hasmukhbhai B. Patel HUF, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

involved in converting its unaccounted money into long-term capital gains by conniving with any entry operator/exit operator, who was involved in artificial price rigging of shares. Thus this is the case wherein the AO merely on the basis of suspicion rejected the claim of the assessee, without establishing ... link between the assessee with the entry operators/exit operators, who were allegedly involved in price rigging of shares. Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the conclusion reached by the Revenue on the basis of the findings recorded in the order passed

Hasmukhbhai B. Patel HUF, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

involved in converting its unaccounted money into long-term capital gains by conniving with any entry operator/exit operator, who was involved in artificial price rigging of shares. Thus this is the case wherein the AO merely on the basis of suspicion rejected the claim of the assessee, without establishing ... link between the assessee with the entry operators/exit operators, who were allegedly involved in price rigging of shares. Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the conclusion reached by the Revenue on the basis of the findings recorded in the order passed

Hasmukhbhai B. Patel HUF, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

involved in converting its unaccounted money into long-term capital gains by conniving with any entry operator/exit operator, who was involved in artificial price rigging of shares. Thus this is the case wherein the AO merely on the basis of suspicion rejected the claim of the assessee, without establishing ... link between the assessee with the entry operators/exit operators, who were allegedly involved in price rigging of shares. Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the conclusion reached by the Revenue on the basis of the findings recorded in the order passed

Hasmukhbhai B. Patel HUF, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

involved in converting its unaccounted money into long-term capital gains by conniving with any entry operator/exit operator, who was involved in artificial price rigging of shares. Thus this is the case wherein the AO merely on the basis of suspicion rejected the claim of the assessee, without establishing ... link between the assessee with the entry operators/exit operators, who were allegedly involved in price rigging of shares. Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the conclusion reached by the Revenue on the basis of the findings recorded in the order passed

Hasmukhbhai B. Patel HUF, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeals for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

involved in converting its unaccounted money into long-term capital gains by conniving with any entry operator/exit operator, who was involved in artificial price rigging of shares. Thus this is the case wherein the AO merely on the basis of suspicion rejected the claim of the assessee, without establishing ... link between the assessee with the entry operators/exit operators, who were allegedly involved in price rigging of shares. Therefore, in view of the above, we are unable to persuade ourselves to accept the conclusion reached by the Revenue on the basis of the findings recorded in the order passed

Mamta Mehta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 31(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

allegation or evidence on record to show that either the assessee or the brokers through whom shares were transacted were involved in price rigging of the alleged scrip. 5. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice dated 10/12/2018, wherein apart from ... through whom assessee had purchased shares of “Prraneta” was one of the suspicious broker or was in any manner connected with operators/brokers involved in price rigging. No investigation was carried out by the Assessing Officer to come to the conclusion that the transaction of purchase and sale of shares

Natwar Lal Gala, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

period. It is submitted that there has to be a direct and clinching evidence to prove that the assessee has indeed facilitated in alleged price rigging activities or accommodation entries. Courts have time and again held that suspicion howsoever strong, cannot take place of hard evidence and suspicion cannot

Natwar Lal Gala, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

period. It is submitted that there has to be a direct and clinching evidence to prove that the assessee has indeed facilitated in alleged price rigging activities or accommodation entries. Courts have time and again held that suspicion howsoever strong, cannot take place of hard evidence and suspicion cannot

Natwar Lal Daga, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

period. It is submitted that there has to be a direct and clinching evidence to prove that the assessee has indeed facilitated in alleged price rigging activities or accommodation entries. Courts have time and again held that suspicion howsoever strong, cannot take place of hard evidence and suspicion cannot

Natwar Lal Daga, Mumbai vs. CIT (A)-52, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

period. It is submitted that there has to be a direct and clinching evidence to prove that the assessee has indeed facilitated in alleged price rigging activities or accommodation entries. Courts have time and again held that suspicion howsoever strong, cannot take place of hard evidence and suspicion cannot

Mamta Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.1442 /मुं/2021 ("न.व. 2011-12) आअसं.1534 /मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2016-17) Mamta Mehta, B-3, Bldg No.3, Saibaba Enclave, Behind Citi Centre, Goregaon West Mumbai 400 062. Pan: Afxpm-6021-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 31(2)(3), Kautalya Bhavan, C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Bhupendra Shah ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Prakash Choughule सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 14/07/2023 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

allegation or evidence on record to show that either the assessee or the brokers through whom shares were transacted were involved in price rigging of the alleged scrip. 5. The ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice dated 10/12/2018, wherein apart from ... through whom assessee had purchased shares of “Prraneta” was one of the suspicious broker or was in any manner connected with operators/brokers involved in price rigging. No investigation was carried out by the Assessing Officer to come to the conclusion that the transaction of purchase and sale of shares

Krutika Rajendra Jain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-19(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

regular investor in shares. Further, there is also no allegation made that the assessee was part of ring which indulged in the alleged price rigging. We notice that the AO has placed reliance on the report of Investigation wing to hold that the assessee has availed accommodation entries ... shares. The Tribunal has also come to a finding that there is no allegation against the assessee that it has participated in any price rigging in the market on the shares of RFL. 3. Therefore we find nothing perverse in the order of the Tribunal. 4. Mr. Walve placed reliance

Income Tax Officer-33(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Sanajy Mahabir Maheshka, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

demat account of the assessee. There is also no allegation made that the assessee was part of ring which indulged in the alleged price rigging. The AO has placed reliance on the report of Investigation wing to hold that the assessee has availed accommodation entries by way of long term ... shares. The Tribunal has also come to a finding that there is no allegation against the assessee that it has participated in any price rigging in the market on the shares of RFL. 3. Therefore we find nothing perverse in the order of the Tribunal. 4. Mr. Walve placed reliance

Income Tax Officer-33(3) (3), Mumbai vs. Shri Sanajy Mahabir Maheshka, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

demat account of the assessee. There is also no allegation made that the assessee was part of ring which indulged in the alleged price rigging. The AO has placed reliance on the report of Investigation wing to hold that the assessee has availed accommodation entries by way of long term ... shares. The Tribunal has also come to a finding that there is no allegation against the assessee that it has participated in any price rigging in the market on the shares of RFL. 3. Therefore we find nothing perverse in the order of the Tribunal. 4. Mr. Walve placed reliance

Mahendra Parakh, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circl20(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm)

demat account of the assessee. There is also no allegation made that the assessee was part of ring which indulged in the alleged price rigging. The AO has placed reliance on the report of Investigation wing to hold that the assessee has availed accommodation entries by way of long term ... shares. The Tribunal has also come to a finding that there is no allegation against the assessee that it has participated in any price rigging in the market on the shares of RFL. 3. Therefore we find nothing perverse in the order of the Tribunal. 4. Mr. Walve placed reliance

Ruia Pradeep Bajranglal HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO - WD 25(3)(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanruia Pradeep Ito, Ward-25(3)(3), Bajranglal Huf Kautilya Bhavan, बनाम/ Ground Floor, Hari Bkc, Bandra, Vs. Nivas, Malviya Road, Mumbai-400051. Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400057. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahr0481E (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

page 15 to 55 of the paper book and. The AO has doubted the purchase and sale of shares and observed that the price rigging is not commensurate with the financials of the company. The assessee has substantiated with all details and information and the revenue could not make