BHARAT DE vs. HI DAGHA,THANEVS.ITO WARD 3(1), KALYAN

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

penny stock company or the stock broker, entry operator despite which those assessees stock broker, entry operator despite which those assessees stock broker, entry operator despite which those assessees could not make any headway. While on this issue, we need to could not make any headway. While on this issue, we need to could not make any headway. While

UDAYAN GROVER,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE(NFAC), DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

penny stock company or the operator which are referred to as "Exit Providers". The unaccounted money of the beneficiaries is routed to these bogus entities "Exit Providers" and the shares held by the beneficiaries are bought by these bogus entities from the money which is the unaccounted money of the beneficiaries. Sometimes, the shares of the LTCG beneficiaries are purchased

LEKHRAJ JASRAJ JAIN ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 19(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15

bogus LTCG income and thereby converted undisclosed income into tax free income income and thereby converted undisclosed income into tax free income income and thereby converted undisclosed income into tax free income Lekhraj J. Jain 6 without paying tax without paying taxes. Information was received that the SEBI has es. Information was received that the SEBI has suspended trading

SHANNO MOHAMMED YUSUF WARSI ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-25(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2013-14

Bogus client purchases the penny stock shares from beneficiary on abnormally higher rate. penny stock shares from beneficiary on abnormally

RAJENDRA KUMAR MUNDRA (HUF),MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NFAC), DELHI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Bogus capital gains from penny stocks: Sureshchandra Agarwal The fact that the Stock Exchanges (ITAT Ahmedabad) ITA No. disclaimed the transaction is irrelevant 1442/Ahd/2013 & CO No. because purchase

ANAND MELLARAM ISSRANI ,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMM. OF INCOME TAX 23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Anand Mellaram Issrani, Acit 23(1), 1St Floor, Charishma Chs, Guru Piramal Chambers, Nanak Road, Bandra Vs. Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aaapi 1267 K Appellant Respondent

purchase of penny stock rchase of penny stock shares for lesser amount and the sale of the shares for higher shares for lesser amount and the sale of the shares for higher shares for lesser amount and the sale of the shares for higher amount fell within the ambit of adventure in the nature of trade and amount fell within

SHRI NILESH HARESH PARWANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-22(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhshri Nilesh Haresh Vs. The Assistant Parwani, 501, Chumchum Commissioner Of Income Saraswati Road, Tax-22 (2) Santacruz West, Room No. 315, Piramal Mumbai – 400 064 Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Angpp1224L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sanjay Parikh Respondent By : Anil Sant Date Of Hearing 08.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 15.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac For A.Y. 2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “A. Addition/Disallowance Of Short Term Capital Loss Rs.1,62,91,466/- 1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Erred On Facts & In Law In Confirming The Addition/Disallowance Of Short Term Capital Loss Of Rs. 1,62,91,466/- As Made By The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, 22(2), Mumbai (Ao). 2. While Confirming The Addition/Disallowance Of The Said Loss, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Appellant Had Not Made Out A Case As To How Such Huge Ltcg/Stcl Has Accrued To The Appellant From Shares Of The Company Named Global Infratech Ltd.

penny stock company or the operator which are referred to as "Exit Providers". The unaccounted money of the beneficiaries is routed to these bogus entities "Exit Providers and the shares held by the beneficiaries are bought by these bogus entities from the money which is the unaccounted money of the beneficiaries. Sometimes, the shares of the LTCG beneficiaries are purchased

ITO 41(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. DEEPIKA ANIL AGARWAL, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands\ndismissed

purchase and\nsale of the penny stock. Failure to provide\ncross-examination is a fatal error\n27. Shri Sunil Prakash V/s.\nACIT\n-15(2)\nΙ.Τ.Α./6494/Mum/2014,\n Assessment Year: 2005-06\nS. 68 bogus

SAROJ DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

bogus purchase of Robinson Shares, the penny stock and he was asked to explain the status of bogus purchase of Robinson

SAROJ DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

bogus purchase of Robinson Shares, the penny stock and he was asked to explain the status of bogus purchase of Robinson

SAROJ DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

bogus purchase of Robinson Shares, the penny stock and he was asked to explain the status of bogus purchase of Robinson

ITO -24(2)(1), MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS vs. KAILASH CHANDRA GUPTA, HUF, MUMBAI

bogus\nbecause the company whose shares allegedly purchased were of penny stock\nand this decision was affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(2) , MUMBAI vs. SHRI VIRAL SARAF MITTAL , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 2(2) V. Viral Saraf Mittal Room No. 806, 8Th Floor 901/902, Capri Heights Old Cgo Annex Building Palli Hill, Bandra (W) M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Azbps0317C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Sidharth Kothari Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

purchases in penny stocks on abnormally higher rate are being done by these paper companies and one of those penny stock is Shreenath in which petitioner was found to be involved in trading. This is far too general. In the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal (supra), on which Mr. Suresh Kumar relied upon, the I.T.O. Azamgarh, subsequent to completion

NITESH RAJHANS SINGH,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER -26(2)(3), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Ms Padmavathy S

penny stock transactions and companies to whom sold shares belonged were bogus in nature Tribunal observing that assessee by submitting records of purchase

SMT. HEMA RAMESH JAIN,THANE vs. ITO WARD - 1(5), KALYAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2966/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Smt. Hema Ramesh Jain बिधम/ Ito, Ward-1(5) 1St Floor, Mohan Plaza, Flat No. 1501, Bldg 2-Greens, Vs. Vasant Lawns, Voltas Wayale Nagar, Compound, Nr Majiwada Khadakpada, Kalyan Flyover, Thane (West)- (W), Maharashtra- 400601. 421301. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afdpj0407L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ajay R. Singh Revenue By: Shri S. N. Kabra (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/01/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 08.08.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Disallowance Made By Ao Regarding The Claim Of Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) Of Rs.23,37,135/- & Taxing The Entire Sale Consideration Of Rs.25,12,020/- On Sale Of Shares Of M/S. Sunrise Asian Ltd. (Hereinafter “M/S. Sunrise”).

bogus penny stock transactions involved the following stages (i) Purchase/Acquisition – The beneficiaries acquire penny stock at a nominal rate which generally takes place as off-market transaction. The shares can be acquired by way of conventional method (i.e. purchase

ASHOK JASRAJ JAIN, HUF,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-19(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ashok Jasraj Jain, Huf, Acit-19(1), 45/12, Rajkotwala Bldg., 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir Bldg., 1St Carpenter Street, C.P. Tank, Vs. Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 004. Mumbai-400 007. Pan No. Aaahj 0191 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mehul Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Sinha, Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022

purchase is an off - market transaction. The sale is market transaction. The sale is debited in the demat account prior to the sale which is purportedly debited in the demat account prior to the sale which is purportedly debited in the demat account prior to the sale which is purportedly through the stock exchange. There is a spectacular gain

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 3(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S JINESH ASHWINKUMAR MATALIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue i

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

bogus and made an addition of Rs 18,61,434/- as unexplained investment in penny stocks and added the same to the total income of the assessee u/s.69 of the Act. 7.3.2 In the submissions filed before me, the assessee submitted that he is engaged in the business of trading in securities and commodities listed on the Stock Exchange over

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 3(3)(1)., MUMBAI vs. M/S JINESH ASHWINGKUMAR MATALIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue i

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

bogus and made an addition of Rs 18,61,434/- as unexplained investment in penny stocks and added the same to the total income of the assessee u/s.69 of the Act. 7.3.2 In the submissions filed before me, the assessee submitted that he is engaged in the business of trading in securities and commodities listed on the Stock Exchange over