NARENDRA SHANTILAL BAPNA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-28(2)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarnarendra Shantilal Bapna V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward – Flat No. A2501, Plot No. R3 बनाम 28(2)(3) B Emerald Bay, Sector 14, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Nerul, Navi Mumbai – Station Complex, Vashi, Navi 400 706, Maharashtra Mumbai– 400703, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aclpb8458J Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. 7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned transaction is bogus, sham and part

SHRI BALKRISHNA GAJANAN THOPTE,THANE vs. DCIT CIR 2, KALYAN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

entry operator. Therefore, generation of\nLTCG through the process from purchase to receipt of cheque is\ntotally arranged and actually no capital gain arose, but assessee's\nown cash has been routed through different entities and ultimately\nreached to his hand by cheque in the disguise of sale proceeds of\nlisted security. Accordingly, the claim of assessee

NIKHIL ASHOK SHIVDIKAR,PAREL MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 20 2 4 MUMBAI , LALBAUG PAREL

Bench: him.

bogus/accommodation entry of Long Term Capital Gains arising from purchase/sale of shares of Splash Media and Infra Ltd. During the assessment

SIRONA DENTAL SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA ( (Accountant Member)

bogus/accommodation entry of Long Term Capital Gains arising from purchase/sale of shares of Splash Media and Infra Ltd. During the assessment

SHRI VIKRAM N. CHANDAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO, 19(3)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. 7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned transaction is bogus, sham and part

CHHAYA KETAN MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 33(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is allowed

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz.\nastronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the\nrelevant companies are based on mere conjectures.\n7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation\nwing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify\nthe conclusion that the impugned transaction is bogus, sham and part

MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL HUF,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. Manoj Kumar Agarwal., AY 2015-16 & 2014-15 7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that

MANOJ KUMAR AGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-10(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. Manoj Kumar Agarwal., AY 2015-16 & 2014-15 7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that

REKHA RAJESH JOGANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. 7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned transaction is bogus, sham and part

ITO-24(3)(1),MUMBAI, PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI vs. RAMA RAJIV JAGDALE, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. 7.2. Reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned transaction is bogus, sham and part

SALONI GIRRAJKISHOR AGRAWAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 25(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C. V. Bhadang & Shri Prabhash Shankarsaloni Girrajkishor Agrawal V/S. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1601/1602, Green Acre, बनाम –25(1)(1),Kautilya Bhavan, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri Bandra Kurla Complex, (West), Mumbai – 400 053, Bandra (East), Mumbai – Maharashtra 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Anupa1692D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. 10.3. Also, reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned transaction is bogus, sham

DHARMENDRA JAYANTILAL SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-31(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawal

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 10.3. Also, reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned

DHARMENDRA JAYANTILAL SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-31(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawal

capital gain declared by the assessee, viz. astronomical increase in the price of shares, weak fundamentals of the relevant companies are based on mere conjectures. AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 10.3. Also, reliance placed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the report of investigation wing without further corroboration based on cogent material does not justify the conclusion that the impugned

MR NILESH BHARANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 612/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

capital gains on sale shares of M/s DB International during F.Y 2010-11 and various persons have taken loan from the assessee and M/s Evergreen Enterprises. The reasons recorded by the AO reads as under:- Reasons for reopening of the assessment in case of Nilesh Bharani (PAR- AABPB4581G for AY 2011-12 u/s. 147 of the Act 1. The assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1), MUMBAI vs. ATUL RAMCHANDRA KSHIRSAGAR, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2019-20

bogus/accommodation entries. Even findings recorded by the Assessing Authority to that effect is not correct and can not be relied upon. From the facts found by the authorities, it is clear that the amount of loan was advanced through the Account Payee Cheques and PAN numbers were also furnished. The amount has been repaid through account payee cheques