“investigation wing”

Aarti Impex, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 19(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

itself, which were only unilateral acts of the assessee and especially when contrary evidences were on records in the form of findings of investigation wing, Mumbai showing the sellers as bogus entities?" 5. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Shri Nilesh Haresh Parwani, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-22(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhshri Nilesh Haresh Vs. The Assistant Parwani, 501, Chumchum Commissioner Of Income Saraswati Road, Tax-22 (2) Santacruz West, Room No. 315, Piramal Mumbai – 400 064 Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Angpp1224L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sanjay Parikh Respondent By : Anil Sant Date Of Hearing 08.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac For A.Y. 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “A. Addition/Disallowance Of Short Term Capital Loss Rs.1,62,91,466/- 1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Erred On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Addition/Disallowance Of Short Term Capital Loss Of Rs. 1,62,91,466/- As Made By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, 22(2), Mumbai (Ao). 2. While Confirming The Addition/Disallowance Of The Said Loss, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Appellant Had Not Made Out A Case As To How Such Huge Ltcg/Stcl Has Accrued To The Appellant From Shares Of The Company Named Global Infratech Ltd.

Employee Stock Option (ESOP) from its employer i.e Vista Print. The assessing officer has mentioned about the detailed investigation carried out by the investigation wing. The AO has also elaborated about the modus operandi adopted for providing accommodation entries for bogus LTCG/STCL in the case of M/s Global Infratech & Finance ... order wherein he also stated that he had also purchased shares of another stock that has been notified as a penny stock by the investigation wing, ‘PINEANIM’ in assessment year 2014-15 and other than this he had not invested in any shares in the stock market since. After taking

Orbit Financial Capital, Mumbai vs. ACIT-19 (2), Mumbai

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) on 17/01/2017, which was I.T.A. No. 271/Mum/2024

income of Rs. 6,70,09,610/- after making disallowance of long term capital loss. 3. The AO was in receipt of information from Investigation Wing regarding some entry operators/exit providers. M/s. Global Infartech was one such company found to be providing accommodation entries. The appellant has shown trading

Vinisha Jitendra Adnani, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 23(3), Mumbai

In the result, based on the above factual observations, proceedings carried out by the AO and further confirmed by the Ld

Bench: Shripavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalvinisha Jitendra Adnani, 101/104, 1St Floor, Spenta, 3 Road, Khar West, Mumbai-400 052 Pan:Adhpa0316M ...... Appellant Vs. Nfac/Ito Ward 23(3)(6), Earnest House, Mumbai. ..... Respondent

emerged out of our review of various orders and documents placed before us during the hearing of the case: 1. The report of the Investigation Wing, Kolkata indicates the name of the scrip as Luminai Tech. In contrast, AO himself vide his order, para 3, page 2 discusses some ... name and reference of Luminai Tech are totally out of context; 2. The observation made above establishes that despite possessing information from the Investigation Wing, Kolkata, AO had not bothered to apply his mind before and after the re-opening of the case. The same observation is further strengthened

DCIT-Circle 19.1, Income Tax vs. Concorde International, Mumbai

Accordingly, appeal filed by the AO is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm Dcit Concorde International Circle 19(1) Ec-B2, 8010, Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Bharat Diamond House, Piramal Chamber, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Lalbaug, Parel, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 012 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabfc9865G Assessee By : Shri Sunil Hirawat, Ar Revenue By : Shri H.M. Bhatt, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.05.2024

itself, which were only unilateral acts of the assessee and especially when contrary evidences were on records in the form of findings of investigation wing, Mumbai showing the sellers as bogus entities? 5." Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Income Tax Officer-42(3)(4), Mumbai, Bkc vs. Suresh Chandra Kachhara, Kandivali

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Vikas Awasthyassessment Year :2012-13. Income Tax Officer -42(3)(4), Kautilya Bhavan, Room No.735, 7Th Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E),Mumbai – 400 051 ---- Appellant Vs. Suresh Chandra Kachhara, B-601-602, Bhoomi Arcade, Opp. Children’S A Academy School, Ashok Nagar, Kandivali, Mumbai – 400 101 Pan: Aafpk-2420-D --- Respondent

those shares. 3. The AO noticed that the shares of M/s Exelon Infrastructure Ltd was identified as one of the penny stocks by the investigation wing. Accordingly, the AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act and assessed the entire sale consideration of Rs.3,85,625/- as unexplained income ... with regard to the transactions carried on by the assessee, i.e., the AO had simply placed his reliance on the report given by the investigation wing. Accordingly, the Ld CIT(A) held that the AO did not apply his mind on the facts of the present case and accordingly, deleted