“entry operator”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 68Section 682,071 judgments

The decision most relied on for entry operator is CIT v. Jamnadevi Agarwal (328 ITR 656), cited in 230 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on entry operator

CIT v. Jamnadevi Agarwal

328 ITR 656 · 2010 · High Court

230

citing judgments

When faced with allegations of bogus long-term capital gains from penny stocks, the Assessing Officer must discharge the onus of proving that the assessee's transactions were not genuine. The assessee can rely on the principle of preponderance of probability, and the Revenue must present substantial evidence to establish that the transactions were a colourable device or that the assessee was an entry operator.

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.

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.

2 CIT v. Indrajit Singh Suri

33 Taxmann.com 281 · 2013 · High Court

100

citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 147/148 against legal representatives of a deceased assessee requires a demonstrable 'reason to believe' that income escaped assessment, often based on third-party information such as alleged accommodation entries.

Dharappa v. Bijapur Co-operative Milk Producers Societies Union Ltd.

9 SCC 109 · 2007 · Reported

citing judgments

When a State Act has obtained presidential assent, its repugnant provisions prevail over the provisions of a Central Act in that State, even if both laws relate to subjects in the Concurrent List. This principle was applied to determine repugnancy between the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, and the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

CIT v. Sanghamitra Bharali

361 ITR 481 · 2014 · High Court

citing judgments

Capital gains arising from sham transactions, particularly those involving penny stocks designed to appear genuine, are not exempt under Section 10(38) but are taxable as unaccounted income brought into the books.

CIT v. Active Traders (P.) Ltd.

214 ITR 583 · 1995 · High Court

citing judgments

When a sum is credited on account of share capital or share premium, the assessee must establish the existence, identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the share applicants, going beyond mere submission of documents. The Assessing Officer has the power to investigate and lift the corporate veil to ascertain the bonafides of such transactions.

Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd.

245 ITR 421 · 2000 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of a transaction for income tax purposes; the substance of the transaction, rather than its accounting treatment, governs its taxability and deductibility.

Judgments citing entry operator

DCIT Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Shivji Garments Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross objections of the assesee are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 9640/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Shilpi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

charging of commission is concerned, it has been held in the case of Sh. Anand Jain and Sh. Naresh Jain that they were entry operators who were managing and controlling various shell concerns including the appellant for providing accommodation entries in lieu of commission. Accordingly, taking that logic there ... charging of commission is concerned, it has been held in the case of Sh. Anand Jain and Sh. Naresh Jain that they were entry operators who were managing and controlling various shell concerns including the appellant for providing accommodation entries in lieu of commission. Accordingly, taking that logic there

DCIT Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Shivji Garments Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and Cross objections of the assesee are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 9639/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Shilpi Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha Gupt, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

Sanyukta Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 22(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2455/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Gunjan Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr.DR

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

I/u/s/148/2012-12/196 dated 12/03/2013 informed that a search and seizure action was taken in the business and residential premises of Shri Surender Kumar Jain (Entry Operator ) group of cases and particulars of accommodation entries provides to large number of companies through bogus & fictitious companies controlled by Sh Jain was detected ... assessee company needs scrutiny, in view of the fact the above entries have been obtained 4 Sanyukta Developers P Ltd., through the entry operator, investigated and reported by the investigation wing. I therefore have reasons to believe that this amount of Rs. 2,30,00,000/- represents income

Komal Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 645/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 645/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Komal Agarwal बिधम / Dcit, Central Circle 7(3) 203, Ugam, N.S Road No.9, Room No 655, 6Th Floor, Vs. Jvpd Scheme, Juhu, Ville Ayakar Bhavan, M.K. Parle (W), Mumbai-400097 Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी लेखध सं/.जीआइआर सं/.Pan/Gir No. : Ahwpr9295B (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Harion TulsiyanFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 68

been influenced by the investigation report submitted by the Investigation Wing of Department functioning at Kolkata. It is true that some 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, loan ... scrips to be penny stocks and the modus operandi adopted by 17 AY 2014-15 Komal Agarwal . those scrips with the connivance of various entry operators, brokers and stock exchange. We find that the ld DR was not specifically able to controvert the documentary evidences filed by the assessee

Aakruti Ketan Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-35(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 53/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS. PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

Later on, the investigation wing of the department from the search conducted u/s 132(1) found that, Shri Vipul Vidhur Bhatt is an established entry operator who is involved in the activity / business of providing bogus accommodation entries to the various beneficiaries for commission from the scrips of Sunrise ... Directors of the company are dummy Directors who are 6 Aakruti Ketan Mehta appointed by him. He has further stated he is an entry operator of shares of M/s. Sunrise Asian Ltd and he alone manages the entire affairs of this company and it is under his control. Further, share

Manu Stock Broking Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 3085/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Miss. Padmavathy S.()

Section 143(3)Section 250

company database available with Investigation Wing Kolkata that the company is among the shell company which is owned, controlled and managed by well known entry operator named Shri Mahendra Kr. Agarwal of Kolkata. The current account of the entities were purposely opened only to deposit cash into the account

Siddharth Enclave Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward- 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1302/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1302/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Siddharth Enclave Pvt. Ltd…..…..…......................…...……………....Appellant Dalmia House, 4, Madan Chatterjee Lane, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aakcs6377D] Vs. Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata………………..............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manoj Tiwari, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Bibekananda Madhu, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 30, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 04.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. In This Case, The Addition Has Been Made By The Assessing Officer & Further Confirmed By The Cit(A) Of Rs.4,45,337/- With The Allegation That The Said Amount Was Received By The Assessee From Various Circuitous Transactions Originated From One M/S Neelkanth Trading Co. The Assessing Officer Received An Information From The Investigation Wing That The Director Of The Said M/S Neelkanth Trading Co., Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh Was In Fact An Entry Operator & He Had Provided

Section 147Section 250

information from the Investigation Wing that the director of the said M/s Neelkanth Trading Co., Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh was in fact an entry operator and he had provided I.T.A. No.1302/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Siddharth Enclave Pvt. Ltd. accommodation entries by moving the funds through different layers which ultimately

Smt. Hema Ramesh Jain, Thane vs. ITO Ward - 1(5), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2966/MUM/2023[2014 - 15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2966/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Smt. Hema Ramesh Jain बिधम/ Ito, Ward-1(5) 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Flat No. 1501, Bldg 2-Greens, Vs. Vasant Lawns, Voltas Wayale Nagar, Compound, Nr Majiwada Khadakpada, Kalyan Flyover, Thane (West)- (W), Maharashtra- 400601. 421301. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afdpj0407L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ajay R. Singh Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2024 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 08.08.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Disallowance Made By Ao Regarding The Claim Of Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) Of Rs.23,37,135/- & Taxing The Entire Sale Consideration Of Rs.25,12,020/- On Sale Of Shares Of M/S. Sunrise Asian Ltd. (Hereinafter “M/S. Sunrise”).

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. SinghFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. AR)

Section 10(38)Section 132(4)Section 391Section 44A

holding statement of shares and ITR copies. In the light of the aforesaid submission and since there is no evidence to link the alleged entry operators with assessee (Shri Vipul Bhatt) the adverse inference drawn against the assessee is devoid of merits and therefore, the impugned action ... Shri Vipul Bhatt has entered into a scam for converting their black money into white. Drawing our attention to the contents/modus-operandi resorted to by entry-operators for providing for providing bogus LTCG as stated in the investigation report (as noted by AO in the assessment order), the Ld. DR submitted

Ajit Kumar Patni, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-28(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 705/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(C)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘C’, KOLKATA [Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member & Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant

Ajit Kumar Patni, Kolkata vs. It0, WD-28(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 704/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 234Section 234BSection 234CSection 271(1)(C)Section 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘C’, KOLKATA [Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member & Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant

Vineet Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent . Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2428/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

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

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153A

again upheld by the court of late. 10. Furthermore, it is submitted that as per the modus operandi stated by you, the alleged entry operators has converted alleged unaccounted money of the assessee into genuine money through such long term capital gains. In this respect, it is submitted that ... separately initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Further, accommodation entry charges in the form of commission are paid in cash to entry operators. The source of cash is not explained, In respect of accommodation entries of LTCG, the market rate is 3% of the amount of entry. Accordingly

Vineeet Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2427/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153A

ACIT, CC-2(1), Kol, Kolkata vs. Shalimar Hatcheries Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 546/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Appellant Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 -Vs.- Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,......................Respondent 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, 17Th Floor, Everest House, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] - A N D - C.O. No. 13/Kol/2023 (In I.T.A. No. 546/Kol/2023) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Shalimar Hatcheries Ltd.,..................Cross Objector 46C, Chowringhee Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700071 [Pan: Aadcs6537J] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 35(1)(ii)

details of bogus billing on 10.03.2015. Q. 6: Please explain the nature of business done by you in detail. Ans.: I am an accommodation entry operator and I am engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in the form of bogus share capital/unsecured loans/bogus bills etc. to various beneficiaries/parties

Spiritual Impressions Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 15 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 7074/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri V.G. Ginde a/w Shri KumarFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chougule, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

assessee from various companies and during the course of investigation, it was found that the share capital has been received from three entry operators, who are allegedly in the business of providing accommodation entries. Notices issued u/s. 131 to these parties were returned undelivered by the postal authorities with

Mrs. Nisha Ashish Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO-31(2) (4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1519/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1519/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Mrs. Nisha Ashish Gupta बिधम/ Ito-31(2)(4) 1501, Anmol Enclave, Opp Pratyakshakar Bhavan, C- Vs. Patel Auto, Goregaon West, 13, Bandra Kurla Mumbai-400062. Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adlpg0969J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vishnu Agarwal/Shri Amit Agarwal Revenue By: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/12/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/01/2024 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 18.08.2021 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Disallowing The Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) Claimed By The Assessee In Respect Of Sale Of Shares M/S. Sunrise Asian Limited (Hereafter “M/S. Sunrise”) Of Rs.98,81,550/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). & Thus Denying Deduction U/S 10(38) Of The Act As Well As Upholding Addition Of Rs.1,97,631/- As Commission For Arranging The Bogus Ltcg (2% Of Commission) U/S 69C Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Agarwal/Shri AmitFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha (Sr

Section 10(38)Section 132(4)Section 147Section 68Section 69C

Sunrise was one of the eighty four (84) penny stock which were used 3 A.Y. 2014-15 Mrs. Nisha Ashish Gupta by entry operators for converting unaccounted money of beneficiaries like assessee in the garb of LTCG/loss, disbelieved the genuinity of the transaction. The AO in the assessment order explained ... modus operandi followed by the entry operators for providing accommodation entries to beneficiaries like assessee in the garb of LTCG/loss; and he wondered as to how the price of a share of M/s. Sunrise purchased at Rs.25/- would command upto Rs.496/- per share in span of two years and disbelieved

Amarjit Kaur Surinder Singh Kochhar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-12(1)(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai

ITA 2513/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleamarjit Kaur Surinder Vs. Ito Ward-12(1)(1), Singh Kochhar, Aayakar Bhawan, 4, Plot No.667, 4Th Floor M.K.Road, Satguru Sundari, Mumbai-400020. Dr. Ambedkar Road, Khar (W), Mumbai-400052. Pan/Gir No. : Agspk6461F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: ShriManiJain&ShriPrateekJain.ARFor Respondent: Shri.G.J.Ninawe. Sr.DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 151Section 68Section 69C

appear anywhere and the AO has simply proceeded to assume that since Shri Ashok Kumar Kayan’s name was in the list of entry operators providing entries relating to Long Term Capital Gain/Loss and, further, since the name of M/s. Access Global Limited figured in the list of scrips traded

DCIT, CC-5(1), Mumbai vs. Hetal N. Shah (Leagal Heir of the Assessee Shri Nitin Rajmal Shah), Mumbai

In the result, we admit the appeal of the AO as it has been replaced by bringing the legal heir of deceased assessee on record but dismissed the appeal on the merits of the addition

ITA 1080/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Hetal Nitin Shah Dcit Legal Heir Of Nitin Rajmal Central Circle 5(1) Room No.1928, 19 Th Floor, Shah Air India Building, 301, Chandramani, Vs. Nariman Point, Hanuman Road, Mumbai-400 021 Vile Parle(E), Mumbai-400 057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadps5476M Assessee By : Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash Bairagra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha

Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 68

lakhs was made on 24/6/2014. During the course of assessment proceedings the learned assessing officer found that these are the two entities wherein entry operator is found to be behind these two entities who have confirmed in a statement under section 132 (4) of the act and further confirmed

Naz Shazia, Moradabad vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Moradabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1831/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshnaz Shazia, Vs. Ito, Anwar House, Ground Ward-1(1), Floor, Pandit Nagla Mini Moradabad Bye Pass Road, Moradabad Pan: Bbwps217R Assessee By : Shri V. K. Tulsian, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri V. K. Tulsian, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 69A

Kolkata Investigation Wing stating that they had identified 84 scrips as penny stocks and that the prices had been artificially rigged up by certain entry operators. One such scrip out of 84 scrips was share of Kailash Auto Finance Ltd (KAFL) which assessee had purchased and sold. Hence ... alleged that assessee is also one of the beneficiaries of the artificially rigged up prices with the assistance of entry operators. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 28.3.2018 to the assessee. For the sake of convenience, the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment

Samrat Finvestors Private Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward- 10(2), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 840/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 840/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Samrat Finvestors Private Limited Income Tax Officer, Ward – 10(2), 20/1, Maharshi Debendra Vs Kolkata 2Nd Floor, Room No. 13A Kolkata - 700007 [Pan : Aadcs4698G] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/R Revenue By : Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/12/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dt. 27/06/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee In The Instant Appeal Has Raised Two Effective Issues In The Various Grounds Before Us Which Are Summed Up As Under:- (I) That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.3,98,50,208/- As Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Alleged Bogus Loss In Share Trading & In F&O Segment. (Ii) The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.11,58,944/- As Made By The Assessing

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Singh, JCIT, Sr. D/R

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 250

Nikky Global 4. The ld. Assessing Officer in para 3.4. of the assessment order referred to the large scale manipulations done by some entry operators in connivance with some brokers to provide pre-arranged long term /short term capital gain / loss/trading loss by price rigging and manipulation on the stock ... have done share trading through stock exchange platform unless any substantive evidences/materials are brought by the Assessing Officer on record qua the brokers and entry operators to the effect they were actually indulged in the rigging and manipulation. The ld. AR also submitted that assessee has not been issued

Nalanda Builders Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 763/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jan 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 763/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Nalanda Builders Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata 5, Sree Charan Sarani Vs Bally Howrah – 711201 (West Bengal) [Pan : Aabcn7736Q] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/R Revenue By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/11/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 11/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dt. 23/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Issues Raised In Ground Nos. 2 To 4 Is Against The Confirmation Of Addition As Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Difference Between The Value Taken By The Assessee & The Fair Market Value (Fmv) U/S 50C Of The Act. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That During The Year, The Assessee Sold Two Flats For An Aggregate Consideration Of Rs.3,00,00,000/- & Accordingly Addition Of Rs.3,26,37,314/- Was Made To The Income Of The Assessee. In 2

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A/RFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 250Section 50CSection 56(2)(x)

have done share trading through stock exchange platform unless any substantive evidences/materials are brought by the Assessing Officer on record qua the brokers and entry operators to the effect they were actually indulged in the rigging and manipulation. The ld. AR also submitted that assessee has not been issued ... these irregularities as alleged by the assessing officer. The ld AR also submitted that the statements of brokers and various other persons such as entry operators were also recorded by the investigation wing which were never supplied to the assessee nor any cross examination was allowed. The ld AR therefore