SHAILESH S. JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

bogus long-term, short-term capital gains, trading profit/loss to the clients. The AO had also made statement of Shri Damodar Attal made part of the assessment order as annexure-1. The evidence found during the search clearly established that Shri Shirish C. Shah had used the platform of BOLT to jack up the price of shares by resorting

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

bogus long-term, short-term capital gains, trading profit/loss to the clients. The AO had also made statement of Shri Damodar Attal made part of the assessment order as annexure-1. The evidence found during the search clearly established that Shri Shirish C. Shah had used the platform of BOLT to jack up the price of shares by resorting

THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI MAHESH SOMABHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

bogus Long Term Capital gain on sale of penny stock scrip. 4. Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) held that the assessee purchased

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. DEVAL PRANAV PATEL L/H. OF LATE SHRI PRANAV MAHENDRABHAI PATEL, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

bogus long term capital gain/loss and short term capital gain/loss. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the reasons recorded were bad as the approval does not mentions the quantum as to how much amount has been claimed as long term capital gain or on account of payment of Commission

SHAMA AJAY PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(IT & TP), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shama Ajay Patel, Vs. 2, Chandroday Society, The Cit(It & Tp), Opp. Golden Triangle, Sp Ahmedabad Stadium Road, Navjivan Post, Ahmedabad-380014 Pan : Alxpp 5273 E अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26.04.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (It & Tp), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. "Cit(It & Tp)" For Short] Dated 08.02.2023, In Exercise Of His Revisionary Powers Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit (It & Tp) Reads As Under:- “1. The Ld. Cit Has Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Without Jurisdiction & Appropriate Powers Available Under The Act. It Is Submitted That The Order Passed U/S. 263 Is Bad In Law As A.O. Has Neither Committed Any Error Nor It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. It Be Held Now.

bogus capital gain earned by the assessee on trading in the scrip of M/s. Kushal Limited. Due reply was filed by the assessee stating that the transaction was genuine, having been incurred through her NRE account and on which short term capital gain had been earned by the assessee subjected to tax @ 15.45%. The ld. CIT (IT & TP), however

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. BHAVESHKUMAR GIRISHBHAI BHANDARI, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

Appeal is allowed in ITA 978/Ahd/2025 and ITA\n978/Ahd/2025 as well

bogus Long-Term Capital Gains and Short-Term\nCapital Gains. The Assessing Officer observed that the price of the scrip had\nabnormally risen from Rs. 2 to Rs. 469 within a short span of time without\nany corresponding improvement in the financials of the company, which\ndemonstrated that the scrip was artificially rigged.\n7. Despite repeated opportunities, the assessee failed

HEMANTKUMAR MANSUKHLAL SONI, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Hemantkumar Mansukhlal Soni, Huf Ito, Ward-1(3)(1) 2254 Mahurat Pole Vs Ahmedabad. Manekchowk Ahmedabad-380001. Pan : Aabhh 1182 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee By Shri S.N. Divatia, Ar & Shri Samir Vora, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/06/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Guptathis Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 27.04.203 15.3.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised In The Appeal Are As Under:

bogus transaction and the statutory onus, as casted upon us, by numerous binding judicial pronouncements of the Hon'ble ITATs and High Courts, regarding the establishment of authenticity and genuineness of the said share transactions and the resultant long-term capital gain, had been fully and completely reflected in statement of Income. It is respectfully submitted that a mere presumption

NRUPAL NARESHCHANDRA RAJA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

long term capital gain and only short term capital gain of Rs.2,01,125/- is earned by me. (iv) I may also inform that during the year under consideration I had purchased and sold shares through one SEBI registered broker, M/s. B.P. Equities Pvt. Ltd. of Mumbai, whose copy of account from my books as well as the contra account

ISMAIL ABDULAZIZ LAKHANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: the same were transferred through registered broker, on the floor of the recognized stock exchange, after suffering Security Transaction Tax and ultimately settled through proper banking channel) as unaccounted income under Section 68 of the Act amounting to Rs.1,51,12,000/-.

long term capital gain, and as discussed the rise in share prices is not holding to any commercial principles and market factors. It is common knowledge that in penny stock transactions, the entire transactions are stage managed and well-orchestrated to conform to the requirements of the Act to satisfy the claim of exemption but the apparent is not real

KISHORI PANKAJ AGARWAL,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , VADODARA, GUJARAT

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

purchase and sale of shares resulting in long term capital gain. Neither these evidences were found by the AO nor by the Id. CIT(A) to be false or fictitious or bogus

SURESH KANTILAL THAKKAR,BANASKANTHA vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed and the Assessing

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

Gains for the impugned assessment year. The Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to Page 140 of the Paper Book (Details of Returns filed by the assessee) and submitted that his was the last year when the return of income had been filed by the assessee and thereafter, neither did the assessee file any return of income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. GIRISHKUMAR AMRATLAL BHANDARI HUF, HIMATNAGAR, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed and the order of\nthe Assessing Officer is restored

bogus Long-Term Capital Gains and Short-Term\nCapital Gains. The Assessing Officer observed that the price of the scrip had\nabnormally risen from Rs.2 to Rs.469 within a short span of time without\nany corresponding improvement in the financials of the company, which\ndemonstrated that the scrip was artificially rigged.\n7.\nDespite repeated opportunities, the assessee failed to provide

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. BHAVESHKUMAR GIRISHBHAI BHANDARI, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the Department is allowed and the order of\nthe Assessing Officer is restored

bogus Long-Term Capital Gains and Short-Term\nCapital Gains. The Assessing Officer observed that the price of the scrip had\nabnormally risen from Rs.2 to Rs.469 within a short span of time without\nany corresponding improvement in the financials of the company, which\ndemonstrated that the scrip was artificially rigged.\n7.\nDespite repeated opportunities, the assessee failed to provide

RACHNA SANJAY SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. PCIT, AHMEDABAD -1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri/St.R. Senthil Kumar & Narendra Prasad Sinhaasst.Year :2014-2015 Rachana Sanjay Shah The Pr.Cit-1 72, Tapovan Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Manekbaug Hall Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380015. Pan : Amdps 6571 P

long term capital gain of Rs.92,12,772/ capital gain of Rs.92,12,772/- by manipulating trading by manipulating trading of penny stock, whereas the AO without making any verification accepted the reas the AO without making any verification accepted the reas the AO without making any verification accepted the returned income including bogus transaction, thereby reassessment returned income including

TEJALBEN SAMIRKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 78/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 Tejalben Samirkumar Shah, Principal Commissioner Of 10, Opera Society, Vs. Income Tax-1, Vibhag-2, Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad-380007. Pan: Askps2898E

Long Term Capital Gain. I am not doing any business or trading activity. The fund is not blocked in Debtors and Stock. So with a view to earn profit out of my Investment, I am investing in purchase of shares. 4. Please find the source of making purchases of shares during FY:-2011-12 to FY:- 2014- 15 marked

LALITA RAMNIRANJAN AGARWAL,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(4), VADODARA

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

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member\nAnd Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member\nITA No. 662/Ahd/2023\nAssessment Year 2015-16\nLalita Ramniranjan Agarwal,\nB-201, Sandal Wood\nResidency, Urmi Char Rasta\nProductivity Road,\nVadodara-390020\nPAN: AECPA0173J\n(Appellant)\nThe ITO,\nWard-1(2)(4),\nVadodara\nVs\n(Respondent)\nAssessee by: Shri P.M. Jagasheth, A.R.\nRevenue by: Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr. D.R.\nDate of hearing\n: 24-02-2025\nDate of pronouncement : 28-02-2025\nORD

Long Term Capital\nAsset. The equity shares are sold through recognized stock exchange (Bombay\nStock Exchange) and security transactions tax have been paid on this\ntransaction.\n29. Now coming to the part of purchase and sale: Purchase is off line and\nmade in cash. Ld. AO has raised doubt on the purchases being made in cash but\nthere

ACIT CC 2(3) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. AISHA DHIRAJ GOGIA, AHMEDABAD

In the result: 50. To summarize the final outcome:

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha["ी संजय गग", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी नरे" साद िस!ा, लेखा सद" के सम#।]

purchased the shop on 20.02.2018, which was about six months before the chat took place and made the addition based on his estimation from the third-party chat. 32. Findings of the Ld. CIT(A): The Ld. CITA deleted the addition so made by the AO. He noted that AY 2018-19 was an unabated assessment year. He held that

HARSHADKUMAR HARGOVANDAS PATEL,KALOL vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

Long-Term Capital Gain after giving\ndue opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering the report\nof the DVO as well as any evidence or explanation that the assessee may\nsubmit in support of its claim.\n8.\nSince the main issue relating to FMV is being restored to the file of the\nAssessing Officer for fresh adjudication