SMT. LAKSHMI AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-4(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with no orders as to costs

Bench: recording satisfaction for issuance of notice since the information is specific. Thus the reasons recorded for re-opening is on borrowed satisfaction and not on any satisfaction by the AO. The

penny stock company listed on BSE and trading in this script is highly suspicious and assessee is one of the beneficiaries who has traded in this script. Thus, it is clear that AO has not even applied his mind as to whether the information is received from DDIT Investigation, Kolkata or from DCIT, Central Circle-3(4) Mumbai. Hence

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Penny Stocks: The fact that the stock is thinly traded and there is unusually high gain is not sufficient to treat the long term capital gains as bogus when all the paper work is in order. The revenue has to bring material on record to support its finding that there has been collusion/ connivance between the broker and the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIDHUSHI KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

penny stock transaction.\n3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or withdraw any of the ground of appeal during the course of appeal proceedings.\nThe revenue has also raised an additional groundvide letter dated 31.12.2024 which reads as under :-\n2. \"Whether on facts and circumstance of the case, the ld. CIT (A) is justified in invalidating the assessment order

M/S DEEPS SPECIAL STEELS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

penny stock still the trading in this share cannot be considered illegal or bogus. There are a large no of case lows on the above issue in favour of assessee, some of which are being submitted below for your immediate reference. Commissioner Of Income Tax-l vs Smt Pooja Agarwal on 11 September, 2017 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

ALOK KUMAR JAIN ,PEARL PLEASURE vs. ACIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, NEW CERNTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN,

Bench: Him.

penny stocks. The ld. AO also noted that the as the assessee has not provided details of purchase and source of payment to purchase shares of YICL to justify the claim u/s. 10(38) of the Act and therefore, he held that Long Term Capital Gain claimed by the assessee from sale of stock of YICL

RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI HUF,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

penny stock and the loss booked was artificial loss. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the AO had examined the case

VIPUL KUMAR MODI ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR -I

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment order passed by the Id. Assessing Officer u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act is found to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 2 2. That the Id. Principal Commissioner of Income- tax grossly erred in treating the exempt Long-Term Capital Gain earned by the assessee appellant as bogus

NAHTA TRADING CO.,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment on basis of 5.6.5 Considering the provisions of the Act and the judicial precedents discussed above it is clear that the AO had prima facie evidence in the form of information from Directorate of Investigation, Kolkata. This tangible material enabled the AO to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of provision

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. HEM CHAND JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Penny stock script M/s. Gini Silk Mills Limited?” 2.2.1 In the Cross Objection, the assessee has taken the following grounds : “1. The ld. CIT (A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in not deciding the ground of the assessee challenging initiation of reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. SANDHYA PATNI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

penny stock, issued notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 on 29.03.2021 after taking approval from the competent authority. In response to the said notice under section 148, the assessee filed her return of income on 06.04.2021 declaring total income of Rs. 30,40,550/-. Thereafter, the AO issued notice under section

ITO, JAIPUR vs. GIRRAJ KHANDELWAL HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

penny stock share namely M/S SWARNSARITA GEMS LTD (Formerly known as Shyam Star Gems Ltd) (PB 7- 8). Assessee has challenged the validity of the notice vide its letter dated 13/11/2018, and again asked to provide supporting evidence and material relied upon by A.O. on issuing notice. (PB 9). Still the Supporting evidence and material has not been provided

SONU AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

penny stocks are allowed to trade in the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). That I fulfilled all the condition u/s 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Moreover, I have erned the income strictly following the norms and guidelines of SEBI. I was not at all in a position to influence the purchase and sale prices of their shares. That

NARESH KUMAR BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

penny stock company were not verifiable from the return of income of the assessee. As such, after recording of 'Reason to believe', proceeding u/s 147 4 Naresh Kumar Bhargava vs. PCIT was initiated and accordingly, after getting approval from Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jaipur, a notice u/s 148 was issued on 19.03.2020, which was duly served upon

GOYAL VEGOILS LIMITED ,KASAR ,KOTA vs. DCIT , CIRCLE -2, KOTA

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings, the assessee stated that during the relevant year, it had entered into sale transactions aggregating Rs.18,83,557/- In support of the sale transactions, the assessee adduced the following evidences- (i) invoice cum delivery challans (ii) Weighment slips of tankers (iii) LRs (iv) bank statement evidencing payment received (v) Copy of ledger account of Shree Ram Trading Company

SH. MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: DR. S. SEETHA LAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

penny stocks company utilised by stock brokers for providing bogus accommodation entries by artificially raising price of such shares, since AO issued said notice without forming an independent opinion on basis of certain tangible material that assessee's income had escaped assessment and mechanically relied upon information received from other source, impugned reopening notice was to be quashed

SMT. SUDHA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no orders to cost

penny stock to convert his undisclosed income into exempt income. AO has to record reasons as to why the transaction reflected in the return of income and claimed exempt is liable for taxation which has escaped assessment and such reasons to believe must be based on tangible material. Whole exercise shows a predetermined mind on the part

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

penny stocks and cases of accommodation entries, or Where mandated by a Court's directions, or i. j. Writ matters, or k. Matters related to wealth tax, fringe benefit tax, equalization levy and any matter other than the Income Tax Act, or l. In respect of litigation arising out of disputes related to TDS/TCS matters in both domestic and International

SPECTRUM FOODS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

penny stock and assessee had entered into transaction with 'U' to claim bogus capital gains, it could not be said that Assessing Officer, on absolutely vague or unspecific information initiated proceedings of reassessment