ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. VIREET INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumaracit, Circle 17 (1) Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 21D, Friends Colony West, New Delhi – 110 065. (Pan : Aaacv2033M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Manish Jain, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 Date Of Order : 06.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2004-05. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2004-05 On 31.10.2004 Declaring Income Of Rs.34,80,69,911/-. The Same Was Processed Under Section 143 (1) Of The 2 Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) On 28.12.2004. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Issued & Served On The Assessee. In Response, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Attended From Time To Time & Submitted Relevant Information As Called For. 3. The Assessee Was Incorporated On 03.10.1983 With The Main Objects, As Per Memorandum Of Association, To Acquire & Hold Shares, Stocks, Debentures, Debenture Stocks, Bonds, Obligations & Securities Issued Or Guaranteed By Any Company Constituted Or Carried On Business In The Republic Of India. After Considering The Submissions Of The Assessee, The Assessing Officer Proceeded To Make The Following Additions In The Assessment Completed U/S 143 (3) Of The Act :-

stock in trade (The facts which has never been disputed by the Ld. AO) and Circular no. 6/2016 dated 29th February, 2016 with subject "Issue of taxability of surplus on sale of shares and securities - Capital Gains or Business Income - Instructions in order to reduce litigation" is squarely applicable on the fact and circumstances of the appellant company

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

ARUN DWIVEDI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-9(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

gain on sale of\nshares of Sankalp Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. which was\nrelated to transactions of the penny stock, Radford Global Ltd.\nwhich was ascertained by the DIT(Inv.), Kolkata to be a scrip\nwhich was used by accommodation entry operator to\nmanipulate prices of penny stock for generating capital

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

capital gains earned by the assessee within a very short period of time by investing in a penny stock i.e. Capital

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

capital gains earned by the assessee within a very short period of time by investing in a penny stock i.e. Capital

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

Capital Gains (penny stock tax in ITS) has occurred and consequently notice under Section 143(2) was issued to enable

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD vs. ROHAN AGARWAL, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Royacit Vs. Rohan Agarwal Room No. 201, Cgo-1 Kd-42, Kavi Nagar 2Nd Floor, Near Purani Ghaziabad Hapur Chungi, Up – 201001 Ghaziabad, Up- 201002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aiupa3170F Appellant .. Respondent

penny stock company as established by the Investigation Wing of the Department which was used for providing accommodation entry and creation of bogus capital gains

SURESH ASRANI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 35(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Smt Diva Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumar

capital gain and penny stocks identified which were used for providing Long Term Capital Gain i.e. M/s Thyrocare Lab Limited

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

gain through penny stock from sale of script M/s\nLifeline Securities Limited....\"\n- No transaction and no capital gain on this

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Capital Gains u/s 10(38) of the Act to the tune of Rs.2,05,58,890/- was\nnot duly inquired into by the Assessing Officer - more particularly when the\nshares traded in by the assessee were found by the Investigation Wing of the\nDepartment to be of a Penny Stock

VIPIN JAIN & SONS HUF,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 56(2), NEW DELHI

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

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royvipin Jain & Sons Huf, Vs. Ito, Ward 56 (2), C/O Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate New Delhi. 206 -207, Ansal Satyam, Rdc, Ghaziabad – 201 002 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aadhv8042G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Tiwari, Advocate Ms. Tanya, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 Date Of Order : 09.04.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, New Delhi[“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 12.12.2018 For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Because The Order Of Learned Lower Authority Is Bad In Law & Against The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Hence Is Unsustainable. 2. Because Ld. Cit (A) Grossly Erred In Law In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.4,27,01,703/-, Being Total Sale Consideration Of Shares U/S 68 Of The Act While Said Amount Is Neither Credited To Books Of Account In The Absence Of Any Accounts Nor Source Of Said Amount Is Under Doubt, Hence Addition Is Beyond The Scope Of Provision.

Capital Gain. He drew our attention to the documents refuting to purchase of 628O0 equity shares for sum of Rs.12,5,600/- in all market transaction to Shri Vishal Yadav in November 2012 and also the factum of dematerialization of shares on 17.1.2014 it was credited to the demat account with Vijaya Bank in the month of January, February

ABHIK FINANCE PVT. LTD.,HARYANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2016-17] Abhik Finance Pvt.Ltd., Vs Acit, 2/3-A, Aravali View, Rail Circle-1(1), Vihar, Sector-56, Gurgaon, New Delhi. Haryana-122002. Pan-Aabca8567A Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri P Praveen Sidharth, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2023

Gains through listed penny stocks. It has been reported that (i) Blazon Marble Ltd, (ii) Eco friendly Food Processing Park Ltd and other companies are penny stocks. Considering the details submitted by the appellant company, it is evident that Mr AnujNagpal, Mrs AnuNagpal& AnujNagpal(HUF) have introduced unaccounted money in the form of bogus Long Term Capital

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 stock which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries for bogus capital gains. The conclusion

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 stock which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business of providing entries for bogus capital gains. The conclusion

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.

capital gains arising out of sale of shares as exemption under Section 10(38).The Assessing Officer denied claim and made certain additions into assessee's income on grounds that said gains were earned through bogus penny stock

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.

capital gains arising out of sale of shares as exemption under Section 10(38).The Assessing Officer denied claim and made certain additions into assessee's income on grounds that said gains were earned through bogus penny stock

DHARAMENDRA BHANDARI (HUF),GURGAON vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms Madhumita Roydharamendra Bhandari (Huf), Vs. Cit(A), A-126, Sushant Lok-1, National Faceless Appeal Gurgaon, Haryana Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aadhd2238J Assessee By : Shri R. S. Ahuja, Ca Shri Pushpdeep Singh, Adv Revenue By: Shri T James Singson, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 02/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/10/2024

gain exemption or bogus claim of short term capital loss. Merely because a particular scrip is identified as a penny stock

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

penny stock trade data and no data available in suspicious transaction report, the AO is not justified treating the long term capital gain