BIKASH KUMAR KEDIA ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.707/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Subhash Kumar Kedia Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afvpk8915Q Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 405/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs. Shri Bikash Kumar Asstt. C. I. T. Kedia Hyderabad Central Circle 3(1) Pan:Afapk8794E Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vamshi Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Two Appeals Filed By Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Dated 31/01/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-11, Hyderabad Relating To Page 1 Of 33

short period, but that alone itself is not a ground to allege that the assessee is also a part of such alleged scam and Long-Term Capital Gain derived from the appellant from purchase and sale of above Page 22 of 33 ITA 707 & 405 of 2020 Subhash Kumar Kedia & Other shares is bogus in nature. Take an example, there

ISHOO NARANG,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.450/Hyd/2022 & S.A. No.1/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ishoo Narang Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 2(1) Pan:Aaupn9082B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Th Vijaya Lakshmi, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 15/07/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Al The Mandatory Preconditions Before Reopening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act Were Duly Complied & Met With By The A.O.

short span of time in collusion with the brokers in order to earn tax free exempt long term Capital Gains. 9. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in holding that the motive of the appellant is not to derive income but to earn a profit, that too, by an arrangement and it is a manipulated transaction in collusion with the brokers

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, CHITTOOR vs. G VIJAYASIMHA REDDY, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

short term in nature. 7. The department submits that Ld. CIT(A) erred in concluding that the capital gain will be long term and thus allowing the claim of deduction u/s 54F. 8. The department further submits, that the claim of assessee towards deduction u/s 54F was allowed without examination of its allowability. IV. ON ORDER

C VAMSI KRISHNA ,HYDERABAD vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 C.Vamsi Krishna V Dcit,Cc-2 Flat No.-401 S. Aaykar Bhawan Rohiwal Windsor Basheerbagh Apartment, Hill Fort Road Hyderabad-500 04 Saifabad Hyderabad-500 004

short term capital gain on transfer of property. Hence taxing the same as unexplained credits in AY 2009-10 leads to double taxation. 11. The Appellant may add or alter or amend or modify or substitute or delete and/or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of appeal

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1)2, HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

short term capital gains declared by Ms. Nitika Kumari under the head "Capital Gains" only. The grounds are accordingly allowed." • Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta ITAT in the case of Vidhi Malhotra Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.cont 361 (Delhi - Trib.) where in it was held that- "Assessee had purchased and sold shares of a company which amalgamated into another company

TARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

short term capital gains declared by Ms. Nitika Kumari under the head "Capital Gains" only. The grounds are accordingly allowed." • Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta ITAT in the case of Vidhi Malhotra Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.cont 361 (Delhi - Trib.) where in it was held that- "Assessee had purchased and sold shares of a company which amalgamated into another company

ARUN KUMAR GOYAL ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

short term capital gains declared by Ms. Nitika Kumari under the head "Capital Gains" only. The grounds are accordingly allowed." • Decision of Hon'ble Calcutta ITAT in the case of Vidhi Malhotra Vs ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.cont 361 (Delhi - Trib.) where in it was held that- "Assessee had purchased and sold shares of a company which amalgamated into another company

NETMATRIX CROP CARE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

Bench: Us:

short-term capital assets. (2) In relation to capital assets being an undertaking or division transferred by way of such slump sale,— (i) the "net worth" of the undertaking or the division, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be the cost of acquisition and the cost of improvement for the purposes of sections

ANIRUDH VENKATA RAGI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

section 68 of the Act by treating long term capital gains as ‘un-accounted income’; and it is for the assessee to establish creditworthiness of companies and that rise of price of shares within a short

SRINIVAS SHAH RADRARAJU ,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.957/Hyd/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Srinivas Shah Rudraraju Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan :Afcpr1979L] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri P.Murali Mohan Rao,Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/01/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 05/02/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.03.2019 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)]-2, Guntur, Pertaining To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is An Individual, Filed His Return Of Income For The A.Y.2014-15 On 31.03.2015, Admitting Total Income Of Rs.53,50,976/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass For The Reason ‘Suspicious Long Term Capital Gain On Shares’ & During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer, Noticed That The 2 Srinivas Shah Rudra Raju

short period, but that alone itself is not a ground to allege that the assessee is also a part of such alleged scam and Long- Term Capital Gain derived from the appellant from purchase and sale of above shares is bogus in nature. Take an example, there may be a group of people who are in collusion with each other

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ,CIRCLE-1(1) , TIRUPATI vs. VENKATA SWAMY RAVURI , CHITTOOR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

short term capital gain. This\ncapi tal gain was arrived at by the Assessing Officer by taking the sale\nconsideration vide document dated 13/02/2017 where in from the total\nsale value the consideration towards the building was taken as Rs.\n2,83,55,680/-. From this amount the opening balance of WDV of block of\nassets of Rs.87

(LATE) AUDINARAYANA REDDY ALTHURI REP.BY L/R MAHESH REDDY ALTHURI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

short term capital gains to various\nbeneficiaries. Further, during the course of investigation, it\nwas noticed that, they have facilitated various entities to\ntrade in shares of M/s. Twenty First Century India Limited\nand other penny scrips for providing accommodation entry\nof bogus long term/short term capital gains. Further,\ninformation received from the Directorate of Investigation,\nKolkata shows that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ALPHA VILLAS PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

68,96,490 99,30,94,560 The shares were reflected in the balance sheet of the Respondent for financial year 2009-10 at page 77 of the Paper Book filed before your Honours. 6. During the assessment year 2011-12, the Respondent sold the shares of Bharathi Cements and offered to tax the net long-term capital gains

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. ALPHA AVENUES PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

68,96,490 99,30,94,560 The shares were reflected in the balance sheet of the Respondent for financial year 2009-10 at page 77 of the Paper Book filed before your Honours. 6. During the assessment year 2011-12, the Respondent sold the shares of Bharathi Cements and offered to tax the net long-term capital gains

SHANKAR LAL AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary

section 68 of the Act by treating long term capital gains as ‘un-accounted income’; and it is for the assessee to establish creditworthiness of companies and that rise of price of shares within a short

ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD vs. SANJAY CHOWDARY GADDIPATI, HYDERABAD

68, in relation to the transfer of\na capital asset, means the full value of the\nconsideration received or accruing as a result of\nthe transfer of the capital asset as reduced by any\nexpenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in\nconnection with such transfer.\n(2) Where the assessee purchases, within the period of 69[two years] after\nthe date

G2 CORPORATE SERVICES LLP, (FORMERLY M/S. G2 CORPORATE SERVICES LTD), SEC'BAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

Short Term Capital Gain on the sale of listed shares the parameters do indicate that assessee is only investing and not trading. Therefore, the capital gains offered by assessee should be assessed as such under the head ‘capital gains’ only. Grounds on this issue are allowed. Disallowance u/s. 14A: 3. This issue arises in both the assessment years

G2 CORPORATE SERVICES LLP, (FORMERLY M/S. G2 CORPORATE SERVICES LTD), SEC'BAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

Short Term Capital Gain on the sale of listed shares the parameters do indicate that assessee is only investing and not trading. Therefore, the capital gains offered by assessee should be assessed as such under the head ‘capital gains’ only. Grounds on this issue are allowed. Disallowance u/s. 14A: 3. This issue arises in both the assessment years

VISHAN RAJ JAIN (HUF),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 (2), HYDERABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Vishan Raj Jain (Huf) Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1(2) 6-3-650, G7 6-3-650, G7, Aaykar Bhawan Maheswari Chambers Opp:L.B.Stadium Somajiguda Basheer Bagh Telangana-500 082 Hyderabad-500 004

capital gain of almost equal amow1.t The AO observed that short-term gain was not genuine inasmuch as the assessee had purchased 45,000 shares of M/s Ankur International Ltd. at varying rates from Rs. 2.06 to Rs. 3.1 per share and sold them within a short span of six-seven months at the rate varying from