Search: transfer pricing | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

32 results for “transfer pricing”+ Penny Stockclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai371 Delhi171 Chennai95 Kolkata85 Ahmedabad64 Jaipur59 Indore53 Calcutta35 Chandigarh32 Hyderabad29 Cuttack23 Pune23 Bangalore20 Guwahati19 Surat18 Rajkot16 Nagpur10 Lucknow10 Amritsar6 Patna5 Varanasi5 Raipur4 Jodhpur2 Visakhapatnam2 Karnataka1 Agra1 Orissa1 Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 153A42 Section 13231 Addition to Income28 Section 250(6)22 Section 10(38)18 Long Term Capital Gains12 Section 26310 Section 6810 Section 69C

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

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

For Appellant: \nShri P.K. Prasad, Advocate &For Respondent: \nDr. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

penny stock\ncompanies controlled by them. These shares were transferred to the\nbeneficiaries at a very nominal price mostly off line

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

9

Section 132(1)9

Reopening of Assessment9

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

ITA 655/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

transferred by the entry operators to such accommodation entry providers through the angadias (cash carriers). Accordingly, the operators then routed the unaccounted cash through the bank accounts of various paper companies and floated dummy / bogus buyers for buying the scrips at the artificially jacked-up share price of such listed securities from the beneficiaries. At that time, the beneficiary

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

ITA 610/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

transferred by the entry operators to such accommodation entry providers through the angadias (cash carriers). Accordingly, the operators then routed the unaccounted cash through the bank accounts of various paper companies and floated dummy / bogus buyers for buying the scrips at the artificially jacked-up share price of such listed securities from the beneficiaries. At that time, the beneficiary

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 715/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.C. Srivastava, Special Counsel

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

price of those penny stocks were artificially jacked up the cartel of various entry providers and this fact had duly been accepted by SCS in his sworn statements. He also observed that the statement of S/Shri R.K. Kedia, Manish Arora, Shrish Chanderkant Shah(SCS), Jagdish Purohit, Parveen Jain (Pintu alias Chintan), Parveen Kumar Agarwal etc were based on the clinching

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 709/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.C. Srivastava, Special Counsel

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

price of those penny stocks were artificially jacked up the cartel of various entry providers and this fact had duly been accepted by SCS in his sworn statements. He also observed that the statement of S/Shri R.K. Kedia, Manish Arora, Shrish Chanderkant Shah(SCS), Jagdish Purohit, Parveen Jain (Pintu alias Chintan), Parveen Kumar Agarwal etc were based on the clinching

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 707/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.C. Srivastava, Special Counsel

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

price of those penny stocks were artificially jacked up the cartel of various entry providers and this fact had duly been accepted by SCS in his sworn statements. He also observed that the statement of S/Shri R.K. Kedia, Manish Arora, Shrish Chanderkant Shah(SCS), Jagdish Purohit, Parveen Jain (Pintu alias Chintan), Parveen Kumar Agarwal etc were based on the clinching

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 712/CHANDI/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.C. Srivastava, Special Counsel

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

price of those penny stocks were artificially jacked up the cartel of various entry providers and this fact had duly been accepted by SCS in his sworn statements. He also observed that the statement of S/Shri R.K. Kedia, Manish Arora, Shrish Chanderkant Shah(SCS), Jagdish Purohit, Parveen Jain (Pintu alias Chintan), Parveen Kumar Agarwal etc were based on the clinching

SMT. AARTI SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 713/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.C. Srivastava, Special Counsel

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

price of those penny stocks were artificially jacked up the cartel of various entry providers and this fact had duly been accepted by SCS in his sworn statements. He also observed that the statement of S/Shri R.K. Kedia, Manish Arora, Shrish Chanderkant Shah(SCS), Jagdish Purohit, Parveen Jain (Pintu alias Chintan), Parveen Kumar Agarwal etc were based on the clinching

SH. SANJAY SINGAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

ITA 706/CHANDI/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. G.C. Srivastava, Special Counsel

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 68Section 69C

price of those penny stocks were artificially jacked up the cartel of various entry providers and this fact had duly been accepted by SCS in his sworn statements. He also observed that the statement of S/Shri R.K. Kedia, Manish Arora, Shrish Chanderkant Shah(SCS), Jagdish Purohit, Parveen Jain (Pintu alias Chintan), Parveen Kumar Agarwal etc were based on the clinching

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 303/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

Penny stock company controlled by them. These shares are transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line

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

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 322/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

Penny stock company controlled by them. These shares are transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line

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

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 321/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

Penny stock company controlled by them. These shares are transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line

MR. RAJAN AGGARWAL (HUF),LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-2, LUDHIANA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is remanded with the above observations

ITA 1036/CHANDI/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav SharmaFor Respondent: Shri N.D.Gupta, JCIT

Section 133(6)Section 68Section 69C

penny stock company controlled by the operators. The shares of such companies are transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price

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

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 305/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA andFor Respondent: \nSmt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 153ASection 263

Penny\nstock company controlled by them. These shares are transferred to\nthe beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line through\npreferential allotment or off-line sale to save STT. The beneficiary\n(an individual) holds the share for one year, the statutory period\nafter which LTCG is exempt under section 10(38) of the Income tax\nAct

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

In the result, the ground no

ITA 355/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 10(36)Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

penny Stocks and LTCG earned thereon were bogus in nature. 3.9 Regarding assessee’s contention that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the AO stated that the said contention is not tenable as the perusal of the contents mentioned at page no. 1 to 182 of Annexure - A seized from Locker no. 194, HDFC Bank shows

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

In the result, the ground no

ITA 351/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 153A

penny Stocks and LTCG earned thereon were bogus in nature. 4.9 Regarding assessee’s contention that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the AO stated that the said contention is not tenable as the perusal of the contents mentioned at page no. 1 to 182 of Annexure - A seized from Locker no. 194, HDFC Bank shows

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

In the result, the ground no

ITA 352/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 153A

penny Stocks and LTCG earned thereon were bogus in nature. 4.9 Regarding assessee’s contention that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the AO stated that the said contention is not tenable as the perusal of the contents mentioned at page no. 1 to 182 of Annexure - A seized from Locker no. 194, HDFC Bank shows

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

In the result, the ground no

ITA 353/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 153A

penny Stocks and LTCG earned thereon were bogus in nature. 4.9 Regarding assessee’s contention that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the AO stated that the said contention is not tenable as the perusal of the contents mentioned at page no. 1 to 182 of Annexure - A seized from Locker no. 194, HDFC Bank shows

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

In the result, the ground no

ITA 354/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 153A

penny Stocks and LTCG earned thereon were bogus in nature. 4.9 Regarding assessee’s contention that no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the AO stated that the said contention is not tenable as the perusal of the contents mentioned at page no. 1 to 182 of Annexure - A seized from Locker no. 194, HDFC Bank shows

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

The appeals are partly allowed

ITA 704/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

For Appellant: \nShri Aditya Kumar, CAFor Respondent: \nShri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

Penny\nstock company controlled by them. These shares are transferred\nto the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line through\npreferential allotment or off-line sale to save STT. The beneficiary\n(an individual) holds the share for one year, the statutory period\nafter which LTCG is exempt under section 10(38) of the Income\ntax