BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

124 results for “capital gains”+ Bogus Purchasesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,680Delhi812Kolkata498Jaipur372Chennai317Ahmedabad296Bangalore184Indore124Pune111Karnataka109Chandigarh107Hyderabad99Surat71Cochin61Nagpur49Lucknow47Calcutta45Raipur43Guwahati32Cuttack32Rajkot29Ranchi21Jodhpur17Amritsar12Visakhapatnam10Agra9Patna8Telangana6Varanasi5Panaji2Orissa2Jabalpur2SC2ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1Dehradun1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 10(38)102Section 6899Section 143(3)78Addition to Income74Section 26360Long Term Capital Gains52Section 14830Section 14727Penny Stock27

SADHU RAM BALANI,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

ITA 470/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Indore24 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisadhu Ram Balani Ito-5(1) Flat No.B-503, Moti Mahal Indore Apartment 28-A, Sector-C Vs. Scheme No.71, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abspb5367L Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2024

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 133A

bogus long term capital gain. There is no dispute that once the assessee has claimed the long term capital gain from purchase

KUMARI AYUSHI NYATI,INDORE vs. ITO-5(5), INDORE

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 203/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore

Showing 1–20 of 124 · Page 1 of 7

Disallowance25
Exemption24
Section 143(2)21
25 May 2021
AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

Capital Gains claimed by the assessee in respect of purchase and sale of penny stock were treated as bogus transactions

VIJAY RADHESHYAM NYATI HUF,DHAR vs. ITO, DHAR

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 704/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

Capital Gains claimed by the assessee in respect of purchase and sale of penny stock were treated as bogus transactions

MANISH KUMAR RADHESHYAM NYATI ,DHAR vs. ITO, DHAR

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 705/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

Capital Gains claimed by the assessee in respect of purchase and sale of penny stock were treated as bogus transactions

SMT. MAMTA NYATI DHAMNOD DISTT. DHAR,DHAMNOD vs. ITO DHAR, DHAR

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 488/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

Capital Gains claimed by the assessee in respect of purchase and sale of penny stock were treated as bogus transactions

SMT VIJAYA NYATI, DHAR vs. ITO, DHAR

In the result appeals of the assessee(s) namely Kumari

ITA 703/IND/2018[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021

Bench: Hon'Ble Manish Borad & Hon'Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year:2014-15 Kumari Ayushi Nyati Ito, 5(5) 10, Balaji Vihar, 1-2, Maa Durg Indore बनाम/ Nagar, Navlakha Main Road 1 To Vs. 7, Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Ajppn2679C Assessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Vijaya Nyati, Ito, Dhar 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road बनाम/ Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. Vs. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aappn8302B Assessment Year:2014-15 Shri Vijay Kumar Radheshyam Ito, Dhar Nyati, Huf बनाम/ 5 Nyati House, Mandi Road Vs. Dhammod, Dist: Dhar M.P. (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aachv4415Q

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133A

Capital Gains claimed by the assessee in respect of purchase and sale of penny stock were treated as bogus transactions

SHRI NILESH JAIN HUF,INDORE vs. ITO 4(2), INDORE

In the result Ground No.2 of the assessee’s

ITA 294/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

bogus Long Term Capital Gain at Rs.1,43,22,060/- which in view of Ld. A.O is claimed as Long Term Capital Gain. There is a factual error in his observation. The assessee received sale consideration of Rs.1,48,71,538/-, the purchase

PRITESH JAIN HUF,INDORE vs. ITO 4 (2), INDORE

In the result Ground No.2 of the assessee’s

ITA 293/IND/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

bogus Long Term Capital Gain at Rs.1,43,22,060/- which in view of Ld. A.O is claimed as Long Term Capital Gain. There is a factual error in his observation. The assessee received sale consideration of Rs.1,48,71,538/-, the purchase

SMT. ANNAPURNA MAHESHWARI,INDORE vs. THE ACIT, 4(1), INDORE

In the result I.T.A.No.315/Ind/2012& I

ITA 315/IND/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

Capital Gain from purchase/sale of equity shares of IFCI Ltd at Rs.46,91,512/- as income from other sources and also holding that these transactions are sham and bogus. From perusal of details, we find that there were three transactions for purchase

SHRI PRADEEP MAHESHWARI HUF,INDORE vs. THE ACIT 3(1), INDORE

In the result I.T.A.No.315/Ind/2012& I

ITA 53/IND/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

Capital Gain from purchase/sale of equity shares of IFCI Ltd at Rs.46,91,512/- as income from other sources and also holding that these transactions are sham and bogus. From perusal of details, we find that there were three transactions for purchase

SMT. ANNAPURNA MAHESHWARI,INDORE vs. THE ITO-4(1), INDORE

In the result I.T.A.No.315/Ind/2012& I

ITA 252/IND/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

Capital Gain from purchase/sale of equity shares of IFCI Ltd at Rs.46,91,512/- as income from other sources and also holding that these transactions are sham and bogus. From perusal of details, we find that there were three transactions for purchase

SMT. SHEELA AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-5(5), INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

ITA 216/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 68

bogus long term capital gain when a. All the transactions stand duly established by contemporaneous, independent third party evidences which have not been disproved i.e. purchase

SMT. SHEELA AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-5(5), INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

ITA 215/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 68

bogus long term capital gain when a. All the transactions stand duly established by contemporaneous, independent third party evidences which have not been disproved i.e. purchase

ANKUR AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE

In the result, all three appeals of two assessee are allowed

ITA 217/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 68

bogus long term capital gain when a. All the transactions stand duly established by contemporaneous, independent third party evidences which have not been disproved i.e. purchase

SHRI ABHISHEK GUPTA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(5), INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 74/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

purchased in cash on 22.11.2011; got transferred in her own demat A/c after about 1 and half year; subsequently sold and declared a hefty capital gain. On these facts which are analogous to the facts in present appeal, the Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench upheld the action of revenue in holding the capital gain as bogus

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/IND/2020[150-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

bogus capital gain, and (ii) addition of Rs. 2,73,105/- on account of estimated brokerage cost incurred by assessee out of unexplained sources. 5. Before proceeding further, we would like to narrate the details of the transactions done by assessee as culled out from the orders of lower- authorities. The assessee claims to have purchased

RUPESH VYAS,INDORE vs. THE ACIT3(1), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 909/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

bogus capital gain, and (ii) addition of Rs. 1,99,847/- on account of estimated brokerage cost incurred by assessee out of unexplained sources. 5. Before proceeding further, we would like to narrate the details of the transactions done by assessee as culled out from the orders of lower- authorities. The assessee claims to have purchased

SARITA BAGDI ,INDORE vs. THE ITO WARD-4(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2011-12

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 143(3)

purchases are not genuine also held that M/s VIP Industries Limited is a penny stock company and the appellant is indulged in getting bogus Long Term Capital Gain

PARMANAND SACHDEV,INDORE vs. ITO 5(5), INDORE

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 609/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

bogus capital gain, and (ii) addition of Rs. 1,39,568/- on account of estimated brokerage cost incurred by assessee out of unexplained sources. 8. Before proceeding further, we would like to narrate the details of the transactions done by assessee as culled out from the orders of lower- authorities. The assessee claims to have purchased

HIMANSHU BOTADEARA HUF,INDORE vs. THE ITO 4(3), INDORE

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assesse are

ITA 155/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 68

bogus transaction of capital gain from the purchase and sale of shares of M/s. Twenty First Century India Limited. The AO has recorded