Search: section 68 | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

198 results for “section 68”+ Penny Stockclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai723 Delhi261 Kolkata198 Jaipur123 Ahmedabad122 Indore70 Chandigarh59 Calcutta59 Hyderabad47 Pune40 Chennai35 Bangalore31 Surat30 Guwahati28 Rajkot23 Cuttack20 Lucknow19 Nagpur14 Ranchi10 Visakhapatnam9 Raipur9 Amritsar8 Patna5 Jodhpur3 Agra2 Jabalpur1 Gauhati1 Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 148134 Section 10(38)75 Section 14774 Section 6873 Addition to Income73 Section 143(3)59 Penny Stock51 Exemption42 Long Term Capital Gains41 Disallowance

NAVANSH VINIMAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 8(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 724/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250

penny stocks credited in his books of accounts. This approach finds support from the scheme of Section 68, which provides

Showing 1–20 of 198 · Page 1 of 10

...

35

Unexplained Cash Credit27

Capital Gains25

EXIM SCRIPS DEALERS PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD-5(3), KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 502/KOL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 502/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Exim Scrips Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3), 412, Mukti Chambers Kolkata Vs 4Th Floor 4, Clive Row Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aaace6906E] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Girish Sharma, Fca Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/09/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/11/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Kolkata (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”) Dt. 10/06/2020, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act’), For Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. This Assessee’S Appeal Is Time Barred By 43 Days. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed. We Have Heard Both The Sides & Find That There Is Reasonable Cause For Delay In Filing Of The Appeal On Time. Hence We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri Girish Sharma, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT, D/R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

penny stocks u/s 68 of the Act. Hence, prima facie, it appears that there was failure on the part of the assessing officer to assess the income correctly, rendering the afore-stated assessment order erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue within the ambit of Section

NAVIN KUMAR KAJARIA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 35, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 1254/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year, the same may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory

SMT. SUSHILA DEVI KAJARIA,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 36, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 1255/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godara

Section 143(3)Section 68

section 68, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year, the same may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory

PURUSHOTTAM DAS AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 35(1) , KOLKATA

ITA 2421/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Years :2012-13 Soumitra Choudhury V/S. Acit, Circle-12 28C, Satish Mukherjee 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Road, Kolkata-700026 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Acnpc 4627 Q] Kolkarta-16 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing Assessment Year :2015-16 Purushottam Das Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Balaji Enterprises, Ward-35(1), Aayakar 83/85 N.S. Road, Ground Bhawan Porva, 110, Floor, Kolkata Shantipally, Kokata- [Pan No.Actpa 9138 Q] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- These Two Assessees Have Filed Their Instant Appeal(S) For Assessment Year(S) 2012-13 & 2015-16 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

penny stocks. AO relied the loss of Rs.25,30,396/- only on the basis of information submitted by the Stock fictitious. AO has also not doubted the genuineness of the documents placed on record by the assessee. AO’s observation and conclusion are merely based on the information representative. Therefore on such basis no disallowance can be made and accordingly

SOUMITRA CHOUDHURY ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 22 , KOLKATA

ITA 256/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Years :2012-13 Soumitra Choudhury V/S. Acit, Circle-12 28C, Satish Mukherjee 54/1, Rafi Ahmed Road, Kolkata-700026 Kidwai Road, [Pan No.Acnpc 4627 Q] Kolkarta-16 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing Assessment Year :2015-16 Purushottam Das Agarwal V/S. Income Tax Officer, C/O Balaji Enterprises, Ward-35(1), Aayakar 83/85 N.S. Road, Ground Bhawan Porva, 110, Floor, Kolkata Shantipally, Kokata- [Pan No.Actpa 9138 Q] 107 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Subash Agarwal Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sankar Halder, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 14-03-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 15-03-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- These Two Assessees Have Filed Their Instant Appeal(S) For Assessment Year(S) 2012-13 & 2015-16 Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

penny stocks. AO relied the loss of Rs.25,30,396/- only on the basis of information submitted by the Stock fictitious. AO has also not doubted the genuineness of the documents placed on record by the assessee. AO’s observation and conclusion are merely based on the information representative. Therefore on such basis no disallowance can be made and accordingly

PRATIK AGARWAL BENEFICIARY TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, C.C.-3(1), , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 2068/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

penny stock companies over a short period of time of little more than one year, the genuinity of such steep rise in the prices of shares needs to be established and the onus is on the assessee to do so as mandated in Section 68

PINKY AGARWAL ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 984/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

penny stock companies over a short period of time of little more than one year, the genuinity of such steep rise in the prices of shares needs to be established and the onus is on the assessee to do so as mandated in Section 68

M/S. NISHIT AGARWAL BENEFICIARY TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 983/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

penny stock companies over a short period of time of little more than one year, the genuinity of such steep rise in the prices of shares needs to be established and the onus is on the assessee to do so as mandated in Section 68

M/S. GATEWAY FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CC - 3(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed as per the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 982/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 250

penny stock companies over a short period of time of little more than one year, the genuinity of such steep rise in the prices of shares needs to be established and the onus is on the assessee to do so as mandated in Section 68

RAJENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-36(1), KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2175/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

ARUN ROY ,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, SILIGURI

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2456/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

SHRUTI MUNDHRA ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(2) , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2606/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

ANIL KUMAR AGARWALA,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), SILIGURI

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2467/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

MAMTA DEVI AGARWALA,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O.,WARD-2(1), SILIGURI

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2468/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

SUSHILA DEVI MUNDHRA ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(2) , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2593/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

SUMIT BAJAJ ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(2) , KOLKATA

In the result, all the appeals of all the captioned assessees are dismissed

ITA 2553/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

penny stock company. Thus the benefit of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act was denied by the ld. Assessing Officer and added the same as income of the assessee under section 68

SMT. SANGITA JHUNJHUNWALA ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 47(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 1918/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Sangita Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 77/79 Sri Arobinda Road, Ward-47(2), 3, Govt. V/S. Salkia, Howrah-711106 Place (West), Kolkata- [Pan No.Aeypj 0474 M] 700 106 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 61 Ashutosh Mukherjee Ward-36(3), Aayakar V/S. Lane, Salkia, Bhawan Poorva, Howrah-711106 Kolkata-700 106 [Pan No.Acppj 8989 E] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala Income Tax Officer, बनाम / (Huf), 77/79 Sri Arobinda Ward-48(4), 3, Govt. V/S. Road, Salkia, Howrah- Place (West), Kolkata- 711106 700 101 [Pan No.Aaehs 5311 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Ashok Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 109, Netaji Subhas Road, Ward-34(2), Aayakar V/S. Goyee House, Kolkata-001 Bhawan, Poorva, [Pan No.Acppj 8990 D] Kolkata-700 107

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

Penny stock which was used for such purposes as admitted by the above referred deponent. 5 1.3. Thus, considering all the facts and circumstances, the AO reached the conclusion that everything I.e., from purchase of stock to receiving of cheque for its sale was done in a systematic and organised manner to give it a real and legal colour

SRI ASHOK JHUNJHUNWALA ,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 34(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 1921/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Sangita Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 77/79 Sri Arobinda Road, Ward-47(2), 3, Govt. V/S. Salkia, Howrah-711106 Place (West), Kolkata- [Pan No.Aeypj 0474 M] 700 106 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 61 Ashutosh Mukherjee Ward-36(3), Aayakar V/S. Lane, Salkia, Bhawan Poorva, Howrah-711106 Kolkata-700 106 [Pan No.Acppj 8989 E] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala Income Tax Officer, बनाम / (Huf), 77/79 Sri Arobinda Ward-48(4), 3, Govt. V/S. Road, Salkia, Howrah- Place (West), Kolkata- 711106 700 101 [Pan No.Aaehs 5311 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Ashok Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 109, Netaji Subhas Road, Ward-34(2), Aayakar V/S. Goyee House, Kolkata-001 Bhawan, Poorva, [Pan No.Acppj 8990 D] Kolkata-700 107

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

Penny stock which was used for such purposes as admitted by the above referred deponent. 5 1.3. Thus, considering all the facts and circumstances, the AO reached the conclusion that everything I.e., from purchase of stock to receiving of cheque for its sale was done in a systematic and organised manner to give it a real and legal colour

SRI SANJEEV JHUNJHUNWALA,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD - 36(3), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

ITA 1919/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2014-15 Smt. Sangita Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 77/79 Sri Arobinda Road, Ward-47(2), 3, Govt. V/S. Salkia, Howrah-711106 Place (West), Kolkata- [Pan No.Aeypj 0474 M] 700 106 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 61 Ashutosh Mukherjee Ward-36(3), Aayakar V/S. Lane, Salkia, Bhawan Poorva, Howrah-711106 Kolkata-700 106 [Pan No.Acppj 8989 E] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjeev Jhunjhunwala Income Tax Officer, बनाम / (Huf), 77/79 Sri Arobinda Ward-48(4), 3, Govt. V/S. Road, Salkia, Howrah- Place (West), Kolkata- 711106 700 101 [Pan No.Aaehs 5311 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Ashok Jhunjhunwala, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 109, Netaji Subhas Road, Ward-34(2), Aayakar V/S. Goyee House, Kolkata-001 Bhawan, Poorva, [Pan No.Acppj 8990 D] Kolkata-700 107

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

Penny stock which was used for such purposes as admitted by the above referred deponent. 5 1.3. Thus, considering all the facts and circumstances, the AO reached the conclusion that everything I.e., from purchase of stock to receiving of cheque for its sale was done in a systematic and organised manner to give it a real and legal colour