VICKY RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

penny stock companies. The appellant states that such contradictory and fluctuating stands in different cases itself speaks of the manner in which the additions have been made and thus the I.T.A Nos. 10 to 13/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 to 2012-13 Page No. 5 impugned addition of Rs.2,94,763/- in the instant case requires to be deleted on this

SAGAR RAJESH JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of respective assessees are partly allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

penny stock companies. The appellant states that such contradictory and fluctuating stands in different cases itself speaks of the manner in which the additions have been made and thus the I.T.A Nos. 10 to 13/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 to 2012-13 Page No. 5 impugned addition of Rs.2,94,763/- in the instant case requires to be deleted on this

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. A.Y. 2011-12:- 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “[I] Addition on account of disallowance of loss in trading of shares of Chandni Textile Engineering Industries Ltd. Rs.1,52.20.891/- 1. That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. A.Y. 2011-12:- 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “[I] Addition on account of disallowance of loss in trading of shares of Chandni Textile Engineering Industries Ltd. Rs.1,52.20.891/- 1. That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. A.Y. 2011-12:- 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “[I] Addition on account of disallowance of loss in trading of shares of Chandni Textile Engineering Industries Ltd. Rs.1,52.20.891/- 1. That on facts, and in law, the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DEVYANI DHARMENDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

penny stocks for which the CBDT vide Circular No. 23 of 2019 dated 6.9.2019 read with OM dated 16th September, 2019 exempted such cases from monetary limit for filing appeal, hence the appeal be decided oh merits. 3. At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 5 days in filing of appeal by the Revenue. However, considering

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DHARMENDRA C SHAH- HUF, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

penny stocks for which the CBDT vide Circular No.23 of 2019 dated 06.09.2019 read with OM vide Circular No.23 of 2019 res with OM dated 16th September, 2019 exempted such cases from monetary limit for filling appeal, hence the appeal be decided on merits. 3. There is delay in filing the appeal by the Revenue for 31 days. However

THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. DEVARSH DHARMENDRA SHAH, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed

penny stocks for which the CBDT vide Circular No.23 of 2019 dated 06.09.2019 read with OM vide Circular No.23 of 2019 res with OM dated 16th September, 2019 exempted such cases from monetary limit for filling appeal, hence the appeal be decided on merits. 3. There is delay in filing the appeal by the Revenue for 31 days. However

VIJAYSINGH NANUSINGH RATHORE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2011-12 Vijaysingh Manusingh Rathore The Ito, Ward-2(1)(1) 130, Kalhar Exotica Vs. Ahmedabad. Science City Road Thaltej, Ahmedabad Gujarat – 380 059. Pan : Adkpr 5315 C (Applicant) (Responent)

delay of 292 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Facts of the Case 3.1 The AO, on the basis of AIR/CIB/ITS data, noted that the assessee had substantial transactions in F.Y. 2010–11 but had not filed return of income for A.Y. 2011–12. Reasons were recorded; approval obtained

KRUTIK ASHOKKUMAR PARIKH HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

condoned under section 253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the delay is due to sufficient cause, substantiated by an affidavit on oath. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in law and facts in confirming the denial of exemption Claimed u/s 10(38) of the Income-tax Acton long term capital gain earned on sale of listed

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(2), (FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

penny stock of Safal Herbs Limited was used and manipulated to generate bogus long term capital gain , and the assessee being beneficiary of such tax evasion wherein the assessee has carried out transaction of Rs. 2,77,500/- in the scrip of Safal Herbs Limited . The additions of Rs. 2,77,500/- was made by the AO to the income

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2)(FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3)), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

penny stock of Safal Herbs Limited was used and manipulated to generate bogus long term capital gain , and the assessee being beneficiary of such tax evasion wherein the assessee has carried out transaction of Rs. 2,77,500/- in the scrip of Safal Herbs Limited . The additions of Rs. 2,77,500/- was made by the AO to the income

AMIT RAJNIKANT JOSHI,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.367/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Amit Rajnikant Joshi The Dy.Cit बनाम/ C-29, Aryaman Bungalows Anand Nagar V/S. Opp. Anand Niketan School Prahaladnagar Road Thaltej, Shilaj Road Ahmedabad – 380 05 Ahmedabad – 380 059 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Abmpj 6798 F अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

penny stock allegedly used for bogus Long-Term Capital Gains (LTCG) transactions. The AO noted that a search conducted on the premises of Sanjay Shah and Jigar Shah revealed a well-planned modus operandi involving synchronized trading, accommodation entries, and receipt of unaccounted cash in exchange for fictitious gains. The AO concluded that the transactions in Dhwanil Chemicals Ltd. were

JHAVERI TRADING AND INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2012-13

penny stock companies, the impugned addition being based on mere surmises and conjectures is wholly unjustified and bad in law. 4. The appellant also states that in assessment orders passed u/s.143(3) of the Act in earlier and subsequent years, including the assessment order passed by the earlier AO u/s.143(3) of the Act, the trading in shares of Gujarat

VIJAY KANTILAL VORA,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2)(1), VADODARA

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vijay Kantilal Vora The Dcit 201, Shrushti Flats, Vs Circle-4(2)(1), Opp. Geb Sub Station, Vadodara Gotri Road, Vadodara-390021 Pan: Aakpv3542 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sunil Talati, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27/05/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokarthis Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 4 Vadodara (Hereinafter Referred As “Ld. Cit(A)” Dated 30.1.2018, Relating To The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred As “Ao”) Under Section 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Referred As “The Act” For The Assessment Year2011-12. 2. Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal: Vijay Kantilal Vora Vs. Dcit Asst. Year : 2011-12

penny stock, purchased at a low price, which is over a period of time ramped up by operators acting in benami names or name lenders. The purchases are off market purchases, and not reported on exchange. [v] The purchases are in the physical form, and dematised only subsequently generally long after the purchase date, close to the date of sale

AYUSH PAVANKUMAR AGRAWAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

delay of 109\ndays is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on\nmerits.\n3.\nFacts of the Case\n3.1 The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of share\ntrading. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed his return of\nincome declaring total income under the head “business” from sale and\npurchase of shares

RAJU BABABHAI DESAI ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Delay condoned. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short) dated 20.09.2024, passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year

JASMINKUMAR PARESHBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2012-13

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee did not file his return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13. The case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of information that the assessee had traded in penny stock