MOHAN THANKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

penny stock and Income from House property in the form of balance sheet also where it is recorded and found

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

penny stock and Income from House property in the form of balance sheet also where it is recorded and found

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

penny stock and Income from House property in the form of balance sheet also where it is recorded and found

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

penny stock and Income from House property in the form of balance sheet also where it is recorded and found

MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRLE - 5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

penny stock and Income from House property in the form of balance sheet also where it is recorded and found

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

house and the seller only receives sales consideration from the stock exchange through the share broker. Therefore, neither the seller knew the purchasers, nor the purchasers knew the seller. In absence of any corroborative evidence that both Seller and Purchaser have indulged into some clandestine transactions, there is not even a remote possibility of hobnobbing. Therefore, the appellant cannot

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

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

house and the seller only receives sales\nconsideration from the stock exchange through the share\nbroker. Therefore, in this way neither the seller was knowing\nthe purchasers, nor the purchasers were knowing the seller.\n11. Thus in the absence of any corroborative evidence that\nboth Seller and Purchaser have indulged into some\nclandestine transactions, there is not even a remote

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)

house and the seller only receives sales consideration from the stock exchange through the share broker. Therefore, neither the seller knew the purchasers, nor the purchasers knew the seller. In absence of any corroborative evidence that both Seller and Purchaser have indulged into some clandestine transactions, there is not even a remote possibility of hobnobbing. Therefore, the appellant cannot

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

House property income is at ₹.1,08,780/- and Profits and\ngains from Business or Profession is ₹.3,39,197/-. After availing\ndeduction under Chapter VIA of ₹.1,83,524/-, total income is declared at\n*.18,88,000/- and Agricultural income is at ₹.9,16,014/-.\n3. Subsequently, Assessing Officer received information from Addl.\nDirector General (Systems

ANOOPKUMAR DEVIDAS RAIMALANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO, CIR-18(1), MUMBAI

house property” shall be\ncomputed after giving the following deduction (i) a sum equal to 30%\nof the annual value of the property and (ii) where the property has\nbeen acquired, constructed, reconstructed with borrowed capital, the\namount of any interest payable on such capital. According to assessee\nhis claim falls under section 24(b) of the Act. Thus

ALKA RAJESH VANIGOTA,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-52, MUMBAI

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

house and the seller only\nreceives sales consideration from the stock exchange through the\nshare broker. Therefore, neither the seller knew the purchasers, nor\nthe purchasers knew the seller. In absence of any corroborative\nevidence that both Seller and Purchaser have indulged into some\nclandestine transactions, there is not even a remote possibility\nof hobnobbing. Therefore, the assessee cannot

BHAVANA LALIT JAIN,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-15(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shriraj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

house property filed her return of income on 31/1/2015 at a total income of ₹ A Y : 2014–15 Bhavna Lalit Jain Versus Income Tax Officer, Mumbai 2,056,540. Subsequently the information has been received from The Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation) Kolkata regarding investment made by various entities in penny stock

VINOD L. GADHIYA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC5(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

stock exchange, SEBI etc. iii) In similar manners, in the case of Durga Prasad More which is pertaining to A.Y. 1958-59 pertaining to conveyance of documents, house property income, in whose name income should be taxed etc when evidence of online recording of documents were not available and accordingly with due respect 28 ITA Nos.2785 to 2788/Mum/2019 & ors. Shri

SMT. HARSH A NITIN THAKKAR,RAIGAD vs. THE DCIT CENT. CIR -3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

House Aaykar Bhavan M.G.Road,Panvel Maharshi Karve Road Raigad-410 206 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAHPT2179C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dineshchandra D Chhajed Vs. The DCIT, CC-3(4) Rajanigandha CHS Aaykar Bhavan Room No.11, Sector-2 Maharshi Karve Road New Panvel Mumbai – 400 020 410206 PAN/GIR No.AABPC1376N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal Revenue by Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh Date

SHRI YOGESH P. THAKKAR,PANVEL vs. THE DCIT , CC-3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

House Aaykar Bhavan M.G.Road,Panvel Maharshi Karve Road Raigad-410 206 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAHPT2179C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dineshchandra D Chhajed Vs. The DCIT, CC-3(4) Rajanigandha CHS Aaykar Bhavan Room No.11, Sector-2 Maharshi Karve Road New Panvel Mumbai – 400 020 410206 PAN/GIR No.AABPC1376N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal Revenue by Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh Date

SHRI YOGESH P.THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT CC-3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

House Aaykar Bhavan M.G.Road,Panvel Maharshi Karve Road Raigad-410 206 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAHPT2179C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dineshchandra D Chhajed Vs. The DCIT, CC-3(4) Rajanigandha CHS Aaykar Bhavan Room No.11, Sector-2 Maharshi Karve Road New Panvel Mumbai – 400 020 410206 PAN/GIR No.AABPC1376N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal Revenue by Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh Date

DINESHCHANDRA D. CHHAJED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC3(4) , MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

House Aaykar Bhavan M.G.Road,Panvel Maharshi Karve Road Raigad-410 206 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAHPT2179C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dineshchandra D Chhajed Vs. The DCIT, CC-3(4) Rajanigandha CHS Aaykar Bhavan Room No.11, Sector-2 Maharshi Karve Road New Panvel Mumbai – 400 020 410206 PAN/GIR No.AABPC1376N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal Revenue by Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh Date

SHRI NITIN POPATLAL THAKKAR,MUMBAI vs. THE DY.CITI CENT. CIR -3(4), MUMBAI

In the result , the appeal of the assessee Shri Dineshchandra D

House Aaykar Bhavan M.G.Road,Panvel Maharshi Karve Road Raigad-410 206 Mumbai – 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AAHPT2179C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dineshchandra D Chhajed Vs. The DCIT, CC-3(4) Rajanigandha CHS Aaykar Bhavan Room No.11, Sector-2 Maharshi Karve Road New Panvel Mumbai – 400 020 410206 PAN/GIR No.AABPC1376N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nilkanth Khandelwal Revenue by Ms. Madhu Malti Ghosh Date