AJMER SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(5), MOHAL

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Disposal Of Appeal.”

cash and signed the registration papers prepared by the buyer and his property dealer. All the statutory works relating to registration was done by the buyer who had deposited the stamp duty charges also. I am illiterate and do not understand the office working. Since I was concerned with my payment, I did care only for receipt of the actual

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

deposition recorded on 27.5.2015, deposed that\ncash is taken from the beneficiaries who wanted to book bogus Long\nTerm Capital Gain. It is stated that the cash

SOHAN SINGH GARCHA,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptac.O. No. 39/Chd/2012 (In Ita No. 973/Chd/2012) "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 Shri Sohan Lal Garcha, Vs. The Dcit, 901/2, Punjab Mata Natar, Circle Vi, बनाम Ludhiana Ludhiana

cash deposits in the bank C.O.No. 39-c-12, C.O. No. 5-C-2013 & ITA Nos. 1337-c-16 & C.O No. 5-c-2013, Shri Sohan Singh Garcha, Ludhiana 7 account and addition of Rs. 17,28,165/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of long term capital gains

SHOBHA SHARMA,SIRSA vs. ITO-WARD-3, SIRSA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

cash of Rs. 29,87,000/- in saving bank account maintained with Central Bank of India, Rania during the year under consideration. In response the assessee furnished the copy of Income Tax Return filed on 26/10/2018. The A.O. asked the assessee to explain the source of the above said deposits. In response the assessee submitted as under: ….That the plots

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)

cash from such beneficiaries, including the appellant, to such accommodation entry providers. 4.7 On the basis of these facts, accommodation entries taken by the appellant and her family members for AY 2014-15 and earlier years have been held by the Assessing Officer as bogus credits taken into their bank accounts in the garb of bogus long term capital gain

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)

cash from such beneficiaries, including the appellant, to such accommodation entry providers. 4.7 On the basis of these facts, accommodation entries taken by the appellant and her family members for AY 2014-15 and earlier years have been held by the Assessing Officer as bogus credits taken into their bank accounts in the garb of bogus long term capital gain

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)

cash from such beneficiaries, including the appellant, to such accommodation entry providers. 4.7 On the basis of these facts, accommodation entries taken by the appellant and her family members for AY 2014-15 and earlier years have been held by the Assessing Officer as bogus credits taken into their bank accounts in the garb of bogus long term capital gain

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)

cash from such beneficiaries, including the appellant, to such accommodation entry providers. 4.7 On the basis of these facts, accommodation entries taken by the appellant and her family members for AY 2014-15 and earlier years have been held by the Assessing Officer as bogus credits taken into their bank accounts in the garb of bogus long term capital gain

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)

cash from such beneficiaries, including the appellant, to such accommodation entry providers. 4.7 On the basis of these facts, accommodation entries taken by the appellant and her family members for AY 2014-15 and earlier years have been held by the Assessing Officer as bogus credits taken into their bank accounts in the garb of bogus long term capital gain

SMT. TEENA GARG,CHANDIGARH vs. PCIT, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain on sale of an asset by\nraising queries and after considering submissions of assessee, PCIT\nwas not justified in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 by\ntreating assessment order as erroneous.\n\nReliance was also placed on judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court\nCase in PCIT Vs. Clix Finance India (P) reported in (2024) 160\nTAxmann.com 357 (Delhi

SHRI PARDEEP KUMAR JAIN,ZIRAKPUR vs. ITO, W-2(3), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 190/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain, The Ito, Ward 2(3), बनाम Chandigarh Flat No.222, Orbit Apartments, 6Th Floor, Zirakpur "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Advpj6719P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

deposit the said capital gains in an account which is duly notified by the Central Government. In other words if he want of claim exemption from payment of income tax by retaining the cash

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account

RAJNI JAIN,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account

SHRI SANJAY JAIN,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account

SANJAY JAIN & SONS,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account

TARUN JAIN,BATHINDA vs. DCIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 625 & 626/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dcit, Shri Tarun Jain, बनाम Central Circle-1, C/O M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Chandigarh Pvt Limited, Bhatinda "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahwpj2158H Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A)-1, Ludhiana Dated 11.3.2018 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

cash, nature of transaction is suspicious and concluded that the Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee was not genuine. The AO also referred to the statement of Sh. Sanjay Jain who admitted the fact that there was generation of unaccounted income on account of suppression of sale and he disclosed an amount of Rs. 2.83 crores on account