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/-.

transfer or sale of shares on the platform of the recognized stock exchange through a registered broker; viii. Documents evidencing transaction of sale of shares being subjected to levy of Securities Transaction Tax by way of contract notes; ix. Copy of bank accounts showing receipt of sale consideration of share through banking channels. 9. Having demonstrated the fact of having

OVEZ ARIFBHAI LAKHANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Has Arisen From The Revisionary Order Dated 12.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Principal

transferred 1000 shares in financial year 2011-12 itself, and the remaining shares were held in demat account . The remaining 18400 shares of KDJHRL were sold in the financial year 2013-14 i.e. impugned assessment year The assessee submitted before the AO during reassessment proceedings bank statements, cross ledger of M/s Prabhudas Liladhar Private Limited and ledger accounts

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

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

penny stocks of Rs. 73,12,905/- on sale of Alang Industrial Gases Ltd. Shares. The assessee has proved the genuineness of the transactions beyond doubt by furnishing contract notes, ledger accounts, bank transactions from books of brokers whereas the AO without any material evidence disallowed the losses of in scripts of Alang Industrial Gases Itd. And the valuation

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

penny stock company and has also taken a specific note of the systematic operation is being conducted by SCS, to provide bogus accommodation losses to various clients. In the “Reason to Believe” dated 11.05.2015, the assessing officer observed that on April 9, 2013, a search and survey action was conducted at the residence and offices of Shri Shirish Chandrakant Shah

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

penny stock company and has also taken a specific note of the systematic operation is being conducted by SCS, to provide bogus accommodation losses to various clients. In the “Reason to Believe” dated 11.05.2015, the assessing officer observed that on April 9, 2013, a search and survey action was conducted at the residence and offices of Shri Shirish Chandrakant Shah

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

penny stock company and has also taken a specific note of the systematic operation is being conducted by SCS, to provide bogus accommodation losses to various clients. In the “Reason to Believe” dated 11.05.2015, the assessing officer observed that on April 9, 2013, a search and survey action was conducted at the residence and offices of Shri Shirish Chandrakant Shah

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

penny stocks of Rs.\n73,12,905/- on sale of Alang Industrial Gases Ltd. Shares. The\nassessee has proved the genuineness of the transactions beyond\ndoubt by furnishing contract notes, ledger accounts, bank\ntransactions from books of brokers whereas the AO without any\nmaterial evidence disallowed the losses of in scripts of Alang\nIndustrial Gases Itd. And the valuation

ITO, WD. 1(2)(2), RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA vs. NEETABEN SNEHALKUMAR PATEL, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is allowed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 247/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2014-15) िनधा"रण वष"

penny stock company which was used for generating bogus LTCG. The price of shares of such stock company were rigged and raised through circular trading. SEBI had placed the company M/s. Unno Industries Ltd. under surveillance and trading in the company was under suspension. (viii) Shri Amit Saraogi, a share broker based in Calcutta had accepted his involvement in providing

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. DENISHA RAJENDRA KESHWANI, AHMEDABAD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.39/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Dcit Smt. Denisha Rajendra बनाम/ Central Circle-1(1) Keshwani V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 009 44, Asopalav Bungalows Nr.Muktidham Temple Thaltej, Ahmedabad – 380 054 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Ahzpk 0889 K (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 22.01.2021, For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Wherein The Cit(A) Has Deleted The Addition Of Rs.1,17,78,534/- Made Under Section 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 1(1), Dcit Vs. Smt. Denisha Rajendra Keshwani Asst. Year : 2015-16

transferred to DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad, in view of an order under Section 127 of the Act, passed by the Pr CIT-3, Ahmedabad, vide order No. Pr.CIT- 3/Centralization/Amrapali Group/2014-15, dated 14.11.2014. Subsequently, due to a change in the incumbent officer, fresh notices under Section 142(1) of the Act were issued on 05.09.2017 and 27.10.2017. 3. During

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)

transfer in and out of shares, as also abstract of transactions furnished by stock exchange, Assessing Officer was not justified in treating capital gain arising from sale of shares as unexplained cash credit.” 8. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Shri Nileshkumar Dashratbhai Patel (in ITA No. 55/Ahd/2020 dated 16.08.2022) considered the very

ATMIBEN ALIPTKUMAR DOSHI,,SABARKANTHA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SK WARD-3, HIMATNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2015-16

Transfer Form itself is dated 04.01.2013. The aforesaid factual matrix amply establishes that entire affair of share purchase by the assessee is a make believe affair, orchestrated as one of the stages in the larger scheme of availing benefit of penny stock shares to bring her unaccounted income/ black money into books of account that to without paying single paisa

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. SANJAY PRATAPRAI MEHTA, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than a racket of accommodation entries. We do notice that

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3)AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Penny Stocks', Assessing Officer had correctly concluded that assessee had entered into a pre-arranged sham transaction so as to convert unaccounted money into accounted money in guise of capital loss; alleged short term capital loss was rightly disallowed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SEBI v. Kishore R. Ajmera [2016] 30. 66 taxmann.com 288 has pointed

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Penny Stocks', Assessing Officer had correctly concluded that assessee had entered into a pre-arranged sham transaction so as to convert unaccounted money into accounted money in guise of capital loss; alleged short term capital loss was rightly disallowed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SEBI v. Kishore R. Ajmera [2016] 30. 66 taxmann.com 288 has pointed

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Penny Stocks', Assessing Officer had correctly concluded that assessee had entered into a pre-arranged sham transaction so as to convert unaccounted money into accounted money in guise of capital loss; alleged short term capital loss was rightly disallowed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SEBI v. Kishore R. Ajmera [2016] 30. 66 taxmann.com 288 has pointed

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Penny Stocks', Assessing Officer had correctly concluded that assessee had entered into a pre-arranged sham transaction so as to convert unaccounted money into accounted money in guise of capital loss; alleged short term capital loss was rightly disallowed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SEBI v. Kishore R. Ajmera [2016] 30. 66 taxmann.com 288 has pointed

JET AIR AGENCIES PVT. LTD,WEST BENGAL vs. THE ACIT, CENTRA CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, Ground Nos

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Penny Stocks', Assessing Officer had correctly concluded that assessee had entered into a pre-arranged sham transaction so as to convert unaccounted money into accounted money in guise of capital loss; alleged short term capital loss was rightly disallowed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SEBI v. Kishore R. Ajmera [2016] 30. 66 taxmann.com 288 has pointed

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

Penny Stock" companies (also known as syndicate member), the share brokers & the entry operator who purchases the shares through paper companies by taking cash. They have also accepted that they receive cash commission from beneficiaries/key operators for being part of the syndicate. As per the documents impounded from the brokers and sub- brokers, suggest that they received huge cash commission