BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

36 results for “bogus purchases”+ Penny Stockclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai785Delhi268Kolkata197Chennai165Ahmedabad140Jaipur128Indore78Chandigarh61Pune51Hyderabad47Calcutta45Bangalore36Surat34Guwahati31Rajkot24Lucknow23Cuttack23Raipur16Nagpur14Ranchi14Visakhapatnam10Amritsar9Jodhpur8Patna7Varanasi5Telangana2Gauhati1Jabalpur1Panaji1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 6852Section 14834Capital Gains27Section 10(38)25Section 69C24Natural Justice24Addition to Income22Section 14719Exemption18

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2376/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate &
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

penny stock are provided to beneficiaries. After a year, beneficiary provides cash to entry operator for having equaling amount of entry of LTCG. Then entry operator or share broker gets such cash deposited to the various accounts and routes it to bogus client. Bogus client purchases

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

Section 14417
Long Term Capital Gains17
Section 234D16

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2373/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate &
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

penny stock are provided to beneficiaries. After a year, beneficiary provides cash to entry operator for having equaling amount of entry of LTCG. Then entry operator or share broker gets such cash deposited to the various accounts and routes it to bogus client. Bogus client purchases

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2375/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate &
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

penny stock are provided to beneficiaries. After a year, beneficiary provides cash to entry operator for having equaling amount of entry of LTCG. Then entry operator or share broker gets such cash deposited to the various accounts and routes it to bogus client. Bogus client purchases

LAXMIPAT DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2374/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate &
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

penny stock are provided to beneficiaries. After a year, beneficiary provides cash to entry operator for having equaling amount of entry of LTCG. Then entry operator or share broker gets such cash deposited to the various accounts and routes it to bogus client. Bogus client purchases

M/S PRECIOUS SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(1)(3), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1778/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sunil D. Surana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

stock exchange. Here the purchase is not mode by public but by the bogus entities managed and controlled by the promoters of the penny

AKSHAY KUMAR RUNGTA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above terms

ITA 66/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.66/Bang/2024 Assessment Year :2015-16

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 151Section 153Section 153CSection 250

purchase of shares of Mahaveer Advanced Rem for Rs.10,60,000/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. b. The authorities below have failed to appreciate that the provisions of section 69A of the Act is not mandatory but discretionary in nature on the facts and circumstances of the case. b. The authorities below have failed to appreciate that

JAYANTILAL BHAGWANCHAND,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 735/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ramanathan, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 10(38)Section 68

purchase evidence, contract note, demat account etc. 9. The allegation of the AO is that the scrip of M/s Comfort Intech Ltd is a penny stock and the modus operandi adopted by it is like penny stock only. However, no evidence in this regard brought on record by the AO suggesting that he has been involved in any such activity

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 507/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

purchase of shares at a very nominal price by the beneficiary of predetermined penny stock company where the price of the shares of the penny stock companies, are rigged and are raised subsequently through circular trading. These operators provide accommodation entries for bogus

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 509/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

purchase of shares at a very nominal price by the beneficiary of predetermined penny stock company where the price of the shares of the penny stock companies, are rigged and are raised subsequently through circular trading. These operators provide accommodation entries for bogus

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 510/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

purchase of shares at a very nominal price by the beneficiary of predetermined penny stock company where the price of the shares of the penny stock companies, are rigged and are raised subsequently through circular trading. These operators provide accommodation entries for bogus

VARSHA DUDHERIA ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 508/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.507 To 510/Bang/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, D.R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234DSection 68Section 69C

purchase of shares at a very nominal price by the beneficiary of predetermined penny stock company where the price of the shares of the penny stock companies, are rigged and are raised subsequently through circular trading. These operators provide accommodation entries for bogus

DINESH KUMAR SINGHI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 379/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Smt. G.P
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

bogus LTCG/STCG or LTCL/STCL and provide accommodation entries by beneficiaries. We note that the Ld.AO in para 7.11 for AY 2013-14 raised serious doubts on capacity of assessee to purchase shares of these companies in such huge volumes, which has not been satisfactorily/reasonably established by assessee to be genuine. Assessee thus did not establish genuineness of purchase and source

DINESH KUMAR SINGHI,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE- 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 378/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Smt. G.P
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

bogus LTCG/STCG or LTCL/STCL and provide accommodation entries by beneficiaries. We note that the Ld.AO in para 7.11 for AY 2013-14 raised serious doubts on capacity of assessee to purchase shares of these companies in such huge volumes, which has not been satisfactorily/reasonably established by assessee to be genuine. Assessee thus did not establish genuineness of purchase and source

RAJIV KUMAR BHUTRA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 5(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/BANG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillaiita. No. 48/Bang/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Rajiv Kumar Bhutra, No. 3, 3Rd Cross, The Income Tax Officer, Mysore Road, Ward – 5 (2) (4), Bangalore – 560 026. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aakpb9339F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Shri Nitish Ranjan, Ca For Revenue : Smt. H. Kabila, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2021 Order Per Beena Pillai, Jm. Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against Order Dated 09/01/2018 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-5, Bangalore. 2. The Ld.Ar Submitted That, There Is A Delay In Filing Present Appeal Before This Tribunal Amounting To 1045 Days. 3. We Note That Assessee Has Not Filed Any Application For Condonation Of Delay & Affidavit In Support Explaining The Delay Of 1045 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Ld.Ar At The Time Of Hearing Relied On Order Passed By Coordinate Smc Bench Of This Tribunal For Assessment Year 2014-15 In Assesses Own Case In Support.

For Appellant: Shri Nitish Ranjan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl. CIT (DR)

penny stocks which are used only to create bogus long term capital gains. 11. Having heard the rival submissions, I am of the view that the assessees should be provided with an opportunity to rebut the evidences/statements relied upon by the A.O. for treating the longterm capital gain declared by the assessees as bogus in nature. From the assessment order

SHRI. SANJIV BHUTRA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 5(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 43/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran“Smc” Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nitish Ranjan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale

purchased 2000 shares of NCL Research & Financial Services Ltd. for Rs.5,38,225/- and sold the same on 24.5.2013 for a sum of Rs.34,04,874/-, resulting in gain of Rs.28.66 lakhs. Since, it was long term capital gains, the assessee claimed the same as exempt. 8. The A.O. noticed both the above said companies have been categorized as Penny

SHRI. RAJIV KUMAR BHUTRA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 44/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran“Smc” Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Nitish Ranjan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale

purchased 2000 shares of NCL Research & Financial Services Ltd. for Rs.5,38,225/- and sold the same on 24.5.2013 for a sum of Rs.34,04,874/-, resulting in gain of Rs.28.66 lakhs. Since, it was long term capital gains, the assessee claimed the same as exempt. 8. The A.O. noticed both the above said companies have been categorized as Penny

SARITA DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE- 1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 380/BANG/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija
Section 10(38)

purchased and later got the same dematerialised and was sold during the year under consideration. The assessee submitted before Ld.AO that transaction of sale was done through recognised stock exchange openly, and he was unaware of the scrip being a penny stock company. Page 6 of 18 ITA Nos. 380 to 382/Bang/2020 2.2. It has been submitted that Ld.AO concluded

SARITA DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE- 1(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 381/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija
Section 10(38)

purchased and later got the same dematerialised and was sold during the year under consideration. The assessee submitted before Ld.AO that transaction of sale was done through recognised stock exchange openly, and he was unaware of the scrip being a penny stock company. Page 6 of 18 ITA Nos. 380 to 382/Bang/2020 2.2. It has been submitted that Ld.AO concluded

SARITA DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the three appeals filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes for all the years under consideration

ITA 382/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri K.R. Pradeep & Ms. Girija
Section 10(38)

purchased and later got the same dematerialised and was sold during the year under consideration. The assessee submitted before Ld.AO that transaction of sale was done through recognised stock exchange openly, and he was unaware of the scrip being a penny stock company. Page 6 of 18 ITA Nos. 380 to 382/Bang/2020 2.2. It has been submitted that Ld.AO concluded

THE HAMLET,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER-WARD-6(2)(4), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 70/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. The Hamlet, No. 11, Kemwell House, The Income Tax Tumkur Road, Officer, Yeshwanthpur, Ward – 6(2)(4), Bangalore – 560 022. Bangalore. Vs. Pan: Aaaft6690D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri H.N. Kincha, Ca : Shri D.K. Mishra, Cit - Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 24-08-2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 16-11-2023 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Arises Out Of The Order Dated 27.12.2022 Passed By The Nfac, Delhi For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Passing The Appellate Order In The Manner Passed. The Appellate Order As Passed Is Bad In Law & Is Liable To Be Quashed. 2. In Any Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Has Erred In Confirming The Assessment Order Passed By The Learned Assessing Officer. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Should Have Quashed, The Order Passed By Assessing Officer Or Atleast Should Have Deleted The Additions Made By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Kincha, CA
Section 133(6)Section 148Section 234BSection 68

stock exchange since they were not listed shares and that the loss of Rs.1,75,000/- was on account of proportionate stamp duty paid on purchase of shares which forms part of acquisition of shares and therefore it is an allowable loss. He thus submitted that the objection of non-granting of cross objection is therefore baseless. We have perused