SACHIN KANODIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 42(2), NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

penny stock being used for obtaining bogus Long Term Capital Gain. NO evidence of actual sale except the contract notes issued by the share broker were produced by the assessee. No question of law, therefore arises in the present case and the consistent finding of fact returned against the Appellant are based on evidence on record. 9. In the aforesaid

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. MAHAVIR SINGHAL, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Ito Vs. Mahavir Singhal Delhi 149, Tarun Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi-34 Pan No.Aixps8088B (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.411/D/2025 (In Ita No.3428/Del/2024) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mahavir Singhal Vs. Ito 149, Tarun Enclave, Delhi Pitampura, Delhi-34 Pan No.Aixps8088B (Appellant) (Respondent)

bogus LTCG through penny stock shares of M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd amounting to Rs. 49,45,330/- during the FY 2013-14 by ignoring the fact that assessee failed to produce the evidence and supporting documents to substantiate its claim in reply dated 26.12.2016 that investment was made on the basis of some expert reports, studies and news

ACIT, CIRCLE-28(1), NEW DELHI vs. ANJU JAIN, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

penny stocks. The AO has also relied upon various judicial pronouncements in this regard. Accordingly, the AO denied the claim of exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act and treated the alleged sale consideration of shares of Rs. 3,52,07,470/- as bogus and held the said amount as ' .unexplained credit and the same was added to total income

PUESH KUMAR GUPTA,DELHI vs. PR. CIT, CENTRAL-3, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

purchase and sales of shares of a penny stock company\ndubious in nature. The report from the Investigation Wing has clearly\nidentified M/s Yamini Investment Co. Ltd. as a penny stock company which\nis engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries in the garb\nof bogus

ARCHIT GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penny stock transactions and companies to whom sold shares belonged were bogus in nature. The Tribunal observing that assessee by submitting records of purchase

ARCHIT GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRALCIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

penny stock transactions and companies to whom sold shares belonged were bogus in nature. The Tribunal observing that assessee by submitting records of purchase

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

penny stock of income tax department used to book bogus LTCG, ld. Counsel submitted that merely mention of name of share would not make a genuine transaction, bogus.Ld. Counsel contended that no independent inquiries were conducted by the ld. AO either from SEBI of stock exchange or broker or CTL to arrive at the adverse conclusion which is mechanical

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-15, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee areallowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice-& Shri Girish Agrawal

penny stock of income tax department used to book bogus LTCG, ld. Counsel submitted that merely mention of name of share would not make a genuine transaction, bogus.Ld. Counsel contended that no independent inquiries were conducted by the ld. AO either from SEBI of stock exchange or broker or CTL to arrive at the adverse conclusion which is mechanical

JYOTI GUPTA,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than a racket of accommodation entries. We do notice that

JYOTI GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than a racket of accommodation entries. We do notice that

ANJALI GUPTA,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD -1(2), GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Ms. Anjali Gupta, Ito, Ward-1(2), A-84, Summit, Dlf City-5, Gurgaon, Sector-56, Gurgaon, Vs Haryana Pan-Aaipg5132F Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, Ca Revenue By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27.10.2025

penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of www.taxguru.in ITA 125/2020 and connected matters Page 8 of 10 providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than

R.D. VOHRA HUF,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT, FARIDABAD

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 165 days in filing\nappeal and appeal of assessee are allowed

penny stock form sale of script M/s.\nAurbindo Pharma Ltd. during the year under consideration. As per record,\nassessee was one of the beneficiaries who had obtained accommodation entries\nin the form of bogus Long Term Capital Gain. Assessee failed to provide\ndocumentary evidence with regard to purchase

ACIT, CIRCLE-50(1), NEW DELHI vs. HARKANWARPAL SINGH LAMBA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

purchase and sale of shares. The AO has reproduced the financial of M/s. Yamini Investment Company Ltd. in the assessment order and it is observed that in F.Y. 2015-16 company has shown revenue from operations at Rs.16.88 Crore and previous year it was 12.59 Crore. The AO did not raise any doubt in respect of profitability and income earning

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. SATYA PRAKASH GUPTA, DELHI

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 3925/Del/2023 (A.Y 2013-14) Deputy Commissioner Of Income V Satya Prakash Gupta Tax, S H-3/1, Model Town, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Part-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aahpg0717H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Adv.Sumit Lalchandani Revenue By Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing 11/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/09/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’

bogus LTCG/STCL through penny stocks. However, there is nothing to suggest that the Circular read with Memorandum would apply with equal force even if the assessee has shown sale and purchase

RACHNA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than a racket of accommodation entries. We do notice that

RACHNA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries of bogus LTCG. However, the reliance placed on the report, without further corroboration on the basis of cogent material, does not justify his conclusion that the transaction is bogus, sham and nothing other than a racket of accommodation entries. We do notice that

NAZ SHAZIA,MORADABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1), MORADABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshnaz Shazia, Vs. Ito, Anwar House, Ground Ward-1(1), Floor, Pandit Nagla Mini Moradabad Bye Pass Road, Moradabad Pan: Bbwps217R Assessee By : Shri V. K. Tulsian, Ca Revenue By: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/01/2024

purchases on the exchange. It is worth mentioning that the concerned persons like brokers, operators, exit providers, etc. have already accepted the fact that trading in the penny stock was a manipulate affair to generate entries of bogus

GYAN PRAKASH GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-10(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Usa.Yr. : 2015-16 Gyan Prakash Gupta, Vs. Ito, Ward 10(4), B-189, Yojna Vihar, New Delhi – 2 New Delhi – 92 (Pan: Adupg2697N) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Bogus LTCG from penny stock. The details of the transaction leading to the aforesaid amount Rs. 1,49,14,984/- as culled out from the assessment order is as under:- LTCG amount Name of penny Quantity of Sale consideration stock penny stock sold Rs. 1,49,14,984/- HPC Bioscience 36100 Rs. 1,52,76,467/- Ltd. 3. Against