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

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

purchase as genuine, the sales, given the\nhigh rates for such penny stocks, with no real buyers, are bogus. The\nevidenciary

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

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

purchased 3,75,000 each, thus holding 10% shareholding of Maa Jagdambe as on March, 2013. It is not an isolated case that the appellant and his family members traded in the penny stock of Maa Jagdambe and earned huge Long Term Capital Gain (exempt income). There are large numbers of such penny stocks from where the appellant

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

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

purchased 3,75,000 each, thus holding 10% shareholding of Maa Jagdambe as on March, 2013. It is not an isolated case that the appellant and his family members traded in the penny stock of Maa Jagdambe and earned huge Long Term Capital Gain (exempt income). There are large numbers of such penny stocks from where the appellant

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

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 and the "LTCG" being an accommodation entry; (xii) The transactions were entered into as a stock market investor on the basis of information available and anticipation as to future price movements and performance of the Company; (xiii) In the online system prevalent on the Stock Exchanges a buyer/seller of shares could not be aware of the counter-party whereby

AARTI 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 and the "LTCG" being an accommodation entry; (xii) The transactions were entered into as a stock market investor on the basis of information available and anticipation as to future price movements and performance of the Company; (xiii) In the online system prevalent on the Stock Exchanges a buyer/seller of shares could not be aware of the counter-party whereby

AARTI 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 and the "LTCG" being an accommodation entry; (xii) The transactions were entered into as a stock market investor on the basis of information available and anticipation as to future price movements and performance of the Company; (xiii) In the online system prevalent on the Stock Exchanges a buyer/seller of shares could not be aware of the counter-party whereby

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 and the "LTCG" being an accommodation entry; (xii) The transactions were entered into as a stock market investor on the basis of information available and anticipation as to future price movements and performance of the Company; (xiii) In the online system prevalent on the Stock Exchanges a buyer/seller of shares could not be aware of the counter-party whereby

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 and the "LTCG" being an accommodation entry; (xii) The transactions were entered into as a stock market investor on the basis of information available and anticipation as to future price movements and performance of the Company; (xiii) In the online system prevalent on the Stock Exchanges a buyer/seller of shares could not be aware of the counter-party whereby

SHRI ABHISHEK SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 321 & 322/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11, 2011-12 Shri Abhishek Soin, The Dcit, C/O Sigma Cartons Pvt. Ltd., Vs Central Circle-Ii, Unit-Ii, Industrial Area-C, Ludhiana. Sua Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anbps9446A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

penny stock. He has not conducted any enquiry. 17.1 On the other hand ld. CIT DR relied upon the orders of the Revenue Authorities. He further relied upon the following judgements: 1. Judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain Vs Pr.CIT - ITA 18/2017 2. Judgement of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court

SHRI ABHISHEK SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 321 & 322/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11, 2011-12 Shri Abhishek Soin, The Dcit, C/O Sigma Cartons Pvt. Ltd., Vs Central Circle-Ii, Unit-Ii, Industrial Area-C, Ludhiana. Sua Road, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Anbps9446A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2025 Hybrid Hearing O R D E R

penny stock. He has not conducted any enquiry. 17.1 On the other hand ld. CIT DR relied upon the orders of the Revenue Authorities. He further relied upon the following judgements: 1. Judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain Vs Pr.CIT - ITA 18/2017 2. Judgement of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court

SMT. GINNY SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

bogus and\nit was of a penny stock. He has not conducted any enquiry.\n17.1 On the other hand 1d. CIT DR relied upon the\norders of the Revenue Authorities. He further relied upon the\nfollowing judgements:\n1. Judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the\ncase of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain Vs Pr.CIT ITA\n18/2017\n2. Judgement

SH. DINESH SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

bogus and\nit was of a penny stock. He has not conducted any enquiry.\n17.1\nOn the other hand 1d. CIT DR relied upon the\norders of the Revenue Authorities. He further relied upon the\nfollowing judgements:\n1. Judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the\ncase of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain Vs Pr.CIT ITA\n18/2017\n2. Judgement

SMT. GINNY SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

bogus and\nit was of a penny stock. He has not conducted any enquiry.\n17.1\nOn the other hand 1d. CIT DR relied upon the\norders of the Revenue Authorities. He further relied upon the\nfollowing judgements:\n1. Judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the\ncase of Sanjay Bimalchand Jain Vs Pr.CIT ITA\n18/2017\n2. Judgement

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)

penny stocks and identity and credentials of both are suspicious in nature and why the LTCG claimed of Rs. 99,16,874/- should not be treated as bogus and added under Section 68 of the Act. 3.7 In response to show cause notice, the assessee submitted as under:  That he has purchased

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)

penny stocks and identity and credentials of both are suspicious in nature and why the LTCG claimed of Rs. 87,04,733/- should not be treated as bogus and added under Section 68 of the Act. 4.7 In response to show cause notice, the assessee submitted as under:  That he has purchased

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)

penny stocks and identity and credentials of both are suspicious in nature and why the LTCG claimed of Rs. 87,04,733/- should not be treated as bogus and added under Section 68 of the Act. 4.7 In response to show cause notice, the assessee submitted as under:  That he has purchased

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)

penny stocks and identity and credentials of both are suspicious in nature and why the LTCG claimed of Rs. 87,04,733/- should not be treated as bogus and added under Section 68 of the Act. 4.7 In response to show cause notice, the assessee submitted as under:  That he has purchased