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 stock. Further, it is fact on purchase and sale price in the market. The assessee has purchased the shares directly from the company and through share transfer

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 stock. Further, it is fact on record that the financials of the company are not commensurate with the purchase and sale price in the market. The assessee has purchased the shares directly from the company and through share transfer

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 as income from undisclosed sources without bringing any direct evidences on record in treating the same suspicious transaction. Thus, addition made by the AO on the basis of the surrounding circumstances on assumption and presumption denying

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. Further, it is fact on record that the financials of the company are not commensurate with the purchase and sale price in the market. The assessee has purchased the shares directly from the company and through share transfer

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. Further, it is fact on record that the financials of the company are not commensurate with the purchase and sale price in the market. The assessee has purchased the shares directly from the company and through share transfer

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. Further, it is fact on record that the financials of the company are not commensurate with the purchase and sale price in the market. The assessee has purchased the shares directly from the company and through share transfer

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. Further, it is fact on record that the financials of the company are not commensurate with the purchase and sale price in the market. The assessee has purchased the shares directly from the company and through share transfer

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

price was not moving in single direction of upward or downward and therefore, pre- arrangement of bogus Long Term Capital Gain in this share was not possible. 6.14. On the observation of the ld. AO on name of CTL scrip appearing in the list of penny stock of income tax department used to book bogus LTCG, ld. Counsel submitted that

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

price was not moving in single direction of upward or downward and therefore, pre- arrangement of bogus Long Term Capital Gain in this share was not possible. 6.14. On the observation of the ld. AO on name of CTL scrip appearing in the list of penny stock of income tax department used to book bogus LTCG, ld. Counsel submitted 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

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

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)

Stocks which includes the shares you have traded in i.e. of M/s Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. 9. We find that SEBI vide interim order dated29-03-2016 and 15-06 -2016 restrained the 246 entities, including the assessee, from accessing the securities market and buying, selling or dealing in securities, either directly or indirectly in any manner, till the further

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), FARIDABAD vs. BHARTI JAIN, DELHI

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Bleito, Ward 1(1), Vs. Bharti Jain, Faridabad Qd-61, Vishakha Enclave, Pitampura, New Delhi-88 (Pan: Aftpg37441G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

transferred into respondent's Demat account where it remained for more than one year. After a period of one year the shares were sold by the said broker on various dates in the Kolkata Stock Exchange. Pursuant to sale of shares the said broker had also issued contract notes cum bill for sale and these contract notes and bills were

JAGDISH MALHOTRA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-16(1), JHANDEWALAN

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

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)

penny stocks. 3 | P a g e There may be absence of direct evidence that cash was introduced for obtaining the accommodation entry but circumstantial evidence is the evidence of various facts and if taken together, they may form a chain of circumstances leading to an inference or presumption of the existence of the principal fact. In the clandestine operations

VIKAS MALU,UAE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA 817/Del/2023 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareek

penny stock share price cannot be regarded as valid ground for denial of LTCG exemption. It was further submitted that the so called SEBI Report was never provided to the Assessee nor does it shown to have implicated the Assessee in any manner. The Stock Market Regulator has not alleged the involvement of Assessee in any manner leading to increase

VIKAS MALU,UAE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-30, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA 817/Del/2023 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Sudhir Pareek

penny stock share price cannot be regarded as valid ground for denial of LTCG exemption. It was further submitted that the so called SEBI Report was never provided to the Assessee nor does it shown to have implicated the Assessee in any manner. The Stock Market Regulator has not alleged the involvement of Assessee in any manner leading to increase

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S GEN X COMMODITIES (P) LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit Vs M/S. Gen X Commodities (P) Ltd., Central Circle-29 Fa-45, Shivaji Enclave New Delhi New Delhi-110027 Pan-Aaaca2303H Appellant Respondent Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Revenue By Assessee By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Ayush Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2025

price just to claim the benefit of deduction uls. 10 (38) or as the case may be some punching error which has been rectified subsequently. We therefore do not find any merit in the argument of the Ld. DR that CCM is akin to penny stock. 12. We find an identical issue had come up before the Mumbai Bench

AKHIL TANEJA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 1(1), GURGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit Vs M/S. Gen X Commodities (P) Ltd., Central Circle-29 Fa-45, Shivaji Enclave New Delhi New Delhi-110027 Pan-Aaaca2303H Appellant Respondent Shri Jitender Singh, Cit Dr Revenue By Assessee By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Shri Ayush Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.07.2025

price just to claim the benefit of deduction uls. 10 (38) or as the case may be some punching error which has been rectified subsequently. We therefore do not find any merit in the argument of the Ld. DR that CCM is akin to penny stock. 12. We find an identical issue had come up before the Mumbai Bench