SANJAY SINGAL (HUF),NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

bogus "LTCG" against cash consideration through accommodation entry providers. 4.1 The details of the long-term capital gains arising to the Appellant in the period covered under the appeal are as follows:- Scrip Purchases

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

bogus "LTCG" against cash consideration through accommodation entry providers. 4.1 The details of the long-term capital gains arising to the Appellant in the period covered under the appeal are as follows:- Scrip Purchases

SANJAY SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

bogus "LTCG" against cash consideration through accommodation entry providers. 4.1 The details of the long-term capital gains arising to the Appellant in the period covered under the appeal are as follows:- Scrip Purchases

SHRI KRISHAN KUMAR JALAN,BANGALORE vs. ITO, W-1, SIRSA

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Term Capital Gains.\n5. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, the transactions\nentered into by you for purchase and sale of shares of NCL Research and\nFinancial Services Ltd. are found to be bogus as the said company\naccommodated bogus entries and issued cheques for bogus Long

SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

bogus Long Term Capital Gains was unearthed by the AO. 6.10 The appellant's insistence that the transactions leading to long-term capital gains are supported by documents such as sale and purchase

M/S SANJAY SINGAL HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

bogus Long Term Capital Gains was unearthed by the AO. 6.10 The appellant's insistence that the transactions leading to long-term capital gains are supported by documents such as sale and purchase

SMT. TEENA GARG,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bogus long term capital gain entries amounting to Rs.\n60,65,724/-(30,24,000/- from Dayanand Singh and of Rs.30,41,724/-\nfrom Lifeline Securities Ltd) during FY 2014-15.\n\n* Immovable property purchased

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 Central Circle-1 Chandigarh स

bogus "LTCG" against cash consideration through accommodation entry providers. 4.1 The details of the long-term capital gains arising to the assessee in the period covered under the appeal are as follows:- Scrip Purchases

AARTI SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals are allowed

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 939/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Shri Aniket Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 4, Amritashergil Marg, New Delhi- 110003 स्थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: CZCPS6126E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1145/Chd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Smt. Aarti Singal बनाम The DCIT Central Circle-1 Chandigarh 53, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110003 स

bogus "LTCG" against cash consideration through accommodation entry providers. 4.1 The details of the long-term capital gains arising to the assessee in the period covered under the appeal are as follows:- Scrip Purchases

BALDEEP SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(1), CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 199/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Baldeep Singh, The Acit, C/O Tej Mohan Singh, बनाम Circle 5(1), Advocate Chandigarh Vs. #527, Sector 10-D. Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Adyps3636F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Varadhan, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.09.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am: Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 10.01.2025 Of Addl./Jcit(A)-1. Nagpur For The A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: -

long term capital gains, bogus short term loss and bogus business loss through manipulation of stock prices as has been made out by the assessing officer and CIT(A) without appreciating the facts of the instant assessee. Rather, it is a case of declared STCG which stands declared in the ITR alongwith sale/ purchase

SH. VIBHAV JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

bogus. 4.9 It was further submitted that the assessee has given the complete details and documentary evidences on the issue of long term capital gains. Even the information has been obtained from Calcutta Stock Exchange's Website Portal. These evidences have been ignored by the AO and the reasons are best known to him. It shows that

SH. BIPAN JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

bogus. 5.9 It was further submitted that the assessee has given the complete details and documentary evidences on the issue of long term capital gains. Even the information has been obtained from Calcutta Stock Exchange's Website Portal. These evidences have been ignored by the AO and the reasons are best known to him. It shows that

SH. ASHISH JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

bogus. 5.9 It was further submitted that the assessee has given the complete details and documentary evidences on the issue of long term capital gains. Even the information has been obtained from Calcutta Stock Exchange's Website Portal. These evidences have been ignored by the AO and the reasons are best known to him. It shows that

SH. ASHISH JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

bogus. 5.9 It was further submitted that the assessee has given the complete details and documentary evidences on the issue of long term capital gains. Even the information has been obtained from Calcutta Stock Exchange's Website Portal. These evidences have been ignored by the AO and the reasons are best known to him. It shows that

SH. AKHIL JAIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, the ground no

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

bogus. 5.9 It was further submitted that the assessee has given the complete details and documentary evidences on the issue of long term capital gains. Even the information has been obtained from Calcutta Stock Exchange's Website Portal. These evidences have been ignored by the AO and the reasons are best known to him. It shows that

ANIKET SINGAL,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

bogus long-term capital gains from the\nsale of listed securities of paper companies.\n4.8 During the year under consideration, the assessee sold shares of\n\"Meenakshi Enterprises” between 14.10.2016 and 10.03.2017, which had been\npurchased during the financial year 2013–14. The assessee claimed the\nresultant long-term capital gain (LTCG) of Rs.7,91,34,944/- arising from

SHRI SATISH SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 303/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Satish Soin, बनाम The Acit, House No.31, Garden Enclave, Central Circle-2, Vs South City-Ii, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Advps6254N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar & Ms. Muskan Garg, Cas राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing आदेश/Order Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

bogus Long Term Capital Gain earned on alleged purchase and sale of a penny stock. 8. We have duly considered

PAWAN GARG,PANCHKULA vs. ITO WARD 5((5) CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1218/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Pawan Garg, The Ito, House No. 766, Sector 16, Vs Ward 5(5), Panchkula. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Abmpg4243N अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.02.2026

bogus Long Term Capital Gain of Rs.61,23,120/- through reputed stocks by issuing ante dated forged contract notes during F.Y.2013-14 relevant to A.Y.2014-15. Vide above notices u/s 142(1), the assessee was required to justify the Long Term Capital Gain with documentary evidence but he has failed to furnish the reply. Therefore, Long Term Capital Gain of Rs.61