G.NARENDAR CHORDIA ,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW 5(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for 14

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

short ‘’the Act’’). Ld. Assessing Officer received information from DDIT (Investigation), Unit-1, CRU, Chennai that assessees were beneficiaries of certain transactions done through one Mr. Prakash Kumar Jojodia, promoter of M/s. Quest Financial Services Limited and M/s. Kwality Credit and Leasing Limited, Kolkata, which resulted in bogus long term capital gains to various persons, including the assessees. ITA Nos.1819

NIRMALA KUMARI CHORDIA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW 5(2), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

short ‘’the Act’’). Ld. Assessing Officer received information from DDIT (Investigation), Unit-1, CRU, Chennai that assessee was beneficiary of certain transactions done through one Mr. Prakash Kumar Jojodia, promoter of M/s. Quest Financial Services Limited and M/s. Kwality Credit and Leasing Limited, Kolkata, which resulted in bogus long term capital gains to various persons, including the assessee. Assessee

NARENDRA DEVAKINANDAN HARLALKA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 10(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1089/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14

bogus long term capital gains/ short term capital gains to facilitate tax evasion. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the :-4-: ITA. No:1089/Chny/2019 Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has purchased

SMT. SUDHA EASHWAR,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 14 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2342/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. Smt. Sudha Eashwar, The Income Tax Officer No.23A, P.T.Rajan Salai, Non-Corporate Ward-14(3) K.K.Nagar, Chennai Chennai-600 078. [Pan: Alxps 0601 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms.Sumathi Venkatraman, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar:

term capital gains arising on sale of said shares. The AO observed that the above sequence of events clearly reveals that assessee has manipulated entire sequence of events related to alleged purchase of aforesaid shares to introduce unaccounted income as an exempt income. The AO called for information u/s.133(6) of the Act from Bombay Stock Exchange (in short

D.RAMGOPAL,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), COIMBATORE

The appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.581/Chny/2022 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri D. Ramagopal Acit बनाम C/O.Mr. G.V. Jhabakh (Fca) Central Circle-1 157, P.M Swamy Colony, Coimbatore. / Vs. 5Th Street, Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Akgpr-3621-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Jhabakh(Ca)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 18-03-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

Short Term Capital Gain without considering the expenses involved to get the title. 2. The assessing officer and the C.I.T. appeal erred in treating cash deposits into bank account as un-explained income. 3. The assessing officer and the C.I.T. appeal also not considered the agriculture income and treating the income at nil without considering the agriculture expenses

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. TVS INVESTMENTS LRD.,, CHENNAI

In the result, the Revenue's appeal as well as the assessee's Cross Objection are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.262/Chny/2017 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit M/S. Tvs Capital Funds (P) Limited (Formerly Known As Tvs Investments Limited) Corporate Circle-3(1) बनाम/ Jayalakshmi Estates, Chennai-600 034. Vs. No.29, (Old No.8), Haddows Road Chennai-600 006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaact-1154-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. D. Praveen (Jcit) -Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 11-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

short term capital gain on investment and it cannot be allowed. Admittedly, in this case, net worth of TVSF&S is negative. TVSF&S is incurring continuously heavy losses and the said company went out on delisting, pursuant to the Securities and Exchange Board of lndiac(Delisting of Securities) Guidelines 2003. Further, TVS Investments Ltd. holds

VIDYA REDDY ,CHENNAI vs. ITO INL. TAXATION WARD 1(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2016/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

purchase of shares and bank statement reflecting the payments made etc. Meanwhile, the A.O received certain details based on the country wide investigation carried out by the Investigation Wing of Kolkata, which revealed that there was an organized racket of generating bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) which is exempt from tax, the modus operandi, the pattern

MUTHUSAMY SHANMUGAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.362/Chny/2023 िनधा(रण वष( /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Muthusamy Shanmugam, The Income Tax Officer, C/O.Ramesh & Ramachandran, Cas Vs. Ward-2(2), New No.39, Old No.29/3, Chennai. Viswanathapuram Main Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Dghps-7897-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R

purchase agreement on 17-05- 2011 with M/s Par Pharmaceuticals LLC, a Delware Corporation for sale of shares. The assessee admitted sale consideration of his share and arrived at long term capital gains of Rs. 54,01,85,018. The assessee claimed cost of acquisition and transaction expenses. The ld. AO noticed that the assessee set off Short term capital

PRAMILA PATEL,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 10 (3),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1827/Chny/2019. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2009-2010. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Pramila Patel, No.27, Gnt Road, Non Corporate Ward 10(3) Puzhal, Chennai. Chennai 600 066. [Pan Aeipp 1044H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

short) dated 28.02.2019 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-2010. ITA No.1827 /2019 :- 2 -: The brief facts of the case are as under: 2. The appellant is an individual. The return of income for the AY 2009-10 was filed on 25.03.2010 disclosing total income of Rs. 1,76,750/-. Subsequently based on the information received from DDIT (Inv) unit

BRAHMAR CELLULOSE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.189/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 Brahmar Cellulose Products Private Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Ameen Manors, S1 & S2, Income Tax, Second Floor, B Block, No. 138, Corporate Circle 1(2), Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aadcb3888M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : None ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

purchase price of Rs.45/- and sale price @ Rs. 10/- per share resulting into Short Term Capital Loss of Rs.7 crores is not a genuine transaction. Thus the resultant Short Term Capital Loss shown by the appellant is bogus loss. Therefore appellant's claim of set off of this Short Term Capital Loss of Rs.7 crores against Short Term Capital Gain

NEETA BOTHRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 9(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2507 & 2508/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Neeta Bothra, 1/1, General Patters Road, Non-Corporate Ward-9(3) Chennai- 600 002. Chennai-6. Pan: Aaipb 0445J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

bogus long term capital gain derived from purchase and sale of shares. 12. We have gone through reasons given by the Assessing Officer to arrive at a conclusion that consideration received for sale of shares of M/s.Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. is unexplained cash credit and assessable u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and we do not ourselves subscribe

NEETA BOTHRA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 9(3), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2507 & 2508/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Neeta Bothra, 1/1, General Patters Road, Non-Corporate Ward-9(3) Chennai- 600 002. Chennai-6. Pan: Aaipb 0445J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

bogus long term capital gain derived from purchase and sale of shares. 12. We have gone through reasons given by the Assessing Officer to arrive at a conclusion that consideration received for sale of shares of M/s.Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. is unexplained cash credit and assessable u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and we do not ourselves subscribe

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1(3), CHENNAI vs. M. MAHADEVAN, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are decided as under:-\nITA Nos\nAssessment\nResult\nYear\nPartly allowed

bogus and fictitious\ntrail. The Ld AO also observed that the sale of fine dining division of\nOCPL to CCMPL included a significantly valued property at 71 cathedral\nroad in Chennai, which was again sold by OCPL to assessee's wife\nMs.Badrunissa at a much lower value. The Ld.AO concluded that the\nentire share transfer transaction was built to avoid

ARAVIND MODI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 11(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S.Jayaraman

Term Capital Gain in his return and claimed it as an exempt income U/s.10(38). The Assessing Officer examined the entire set of transactions and held, inter alia, that the assessee has deliberately entered into a sham transaction of purchase and sale of bogus shares with full knowledge of such transactions in view of the substantial gains shown

SOHANRAJ UTTAMCHAND ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 2 , CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1787/Chny/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vs The Dcit, Shri Sohanraj Uttamchand, Non-Corporate Circle – 2, 24/12. Raghaviah Road, Chennai T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. Pan: Aaapu7932P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

short span of pre-determined time, which prompted him to acquire those shares. However the assessee has not disclosed the name of the person from whom he had received such tip. (xii) Shri Sohanraj Praveen Kumar, the brother of the assessee, by similar transactions booked bogus long term capital gain and claimed exemption U/s.10(38) of the Act amounting

SHRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR HIRAWAT,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 9 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 900/Mds/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No.10, Monteith Lane, Income Tax, Egmore, Non Corporate Circle -9(1), Chennai 600 008. Chennai. [Pan Aaaph 6105P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

short ‘’the Act’’). Facts apropos are that assessee filed his return of income 2. for the impugned assessment year disclosing income of "78,49,730/-. Assessee had claimed long term capital gains of "58,83,606/- as exempt u/s.10(38) of the Act. Explanation of the assessee was sought on such long term capital gains. Its reply as under

SHRI. VINAY KUMAR HIRAWAT,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 9 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 901/Mds/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-2014. Shri. Vinay Kumar Hirawat, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No.10, Monteith Lane, Income Tax, Egmore, Non Corporate Circle -9(1), Chennai 600 008. Chennai. [Pan Aaaph 6106Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

short ‘’the Act’’). Facts apropos are that assessee filed his return of income 2. for the impugned assessment year disclosing income of "92,68,560/-. Assessee had claimed long term capital gains of "94,12,912/- as exempt u/s.10(38) of the Act. Explanation of the assessee was sought on such long term capital gains. Its reply as under

MANJU BAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 5(3), CHENNAI

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

Term Capital Gains (LTCG) 3.1 The assessee earned LTCG on sale of 4200 shares of M/s Turbo Tech Engineering Ltd. and claimed the same to be exempt u/s 10(38). It was noted that the shares were purchased by the assessee for Rs.1.50 Lacs whereas the same were sold at exorbitant price of Rs.20.11 Lacs. The purchase of shares