DCIT, CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. NARESH LAXMINARAYAN GROVER, NAGPUR

In the result, all these three appeals for the A

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

capital gains of penny stock companies as bogus based on the test of preponderance of probability gathered from various circumstances

ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR vs. SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA,, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Acit Vs. Shri Vinod Balbhadra Goenka Circle-4 247, Nandanvan Layout Nagpur Nagpur Pan No.:Aanpg 6841 N Appellant Respondent Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Assessee By: Shri K.P. Dewani, Adv Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal By Revenue Against Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur Dated 30/03/2017 In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 4/198/16-17 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are As Under:

penny stock. disregarding the direct evidences filed by the assessee in the form of Contract Notes, brokers’ confirmation and PA No. Without making any enquiry on his part, the AO simply formed a belief that since some irregular practices have happened in the stock market, the windfall gain made by the assessee is a result of such malpractices. We find

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

penny stock company, does not have any worthwhile asset, creditworthy business, strong financials or any other indicator in justify its soaring share prices which has been manipulated to give accommodation entries in the form of bogus long term capital gains

ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI NANDKUMAR KHATTUMAL HARCHANDANI , NAGPUR

penny stock company, does not have any worthwhile asset, creditworthy business, strong financials or any other indicator in justify its soaring share prices which has been manipulated to give accommodation entries in the form of bogus long term capital gains

RAJESH SARDA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR

In the result, the addition of undisclosed income under section 68 is deleted

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Sarda, Acit, Central Circle – 2(2), Nagpur 14, Daga Lay–Out, Ambazari Road, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Nagpur – 440033. Maharashtra – 440001. [Pan: Ahaps4925M] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

penny stock. Such information was based on the investigation carried out by Investigation Wing, Kolkata. The assessee is one of the beneficiary who has availed bogus long term capital gain

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. SHIKHA INDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

penny stock on the basis of which the capital gain was wrongly claimed. 17 6.1 On the facts of case

DCIT-CC-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. INDRAKUMAR GHISULAL AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

penny stock on the basis of which the capital gain was wrongly claimed. 6.1 On the facts of case, no question

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SANJAY GAURISHANKAR AGRAWAL , NAGPUR

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Penny Stock) During the assessment proceedings, it was noticed that assessee had declared long term capital gains of Rs.94,60,989/- and claimed

PRAMOD AGRAWAL ,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

Accordingly, the grounds of appeal 2 & 3 are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sh. Pramod Agrawal (Huf) Pr. Cit-2, 301, Sai Ankur Apartments Nagpur-440 001 Ramdaspeth Vs. Nagpur-440 010 Pan:Aaihp 2699N (Respondent) (Appellant)

Capital Gain trading in a Penny Stock Company. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 28.03.2018 has been

PRADEEP DATTATRAYA BANGINWAR,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 28/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Pradeep Dattatraya Banginwar, At- Trimurti Sales, Datta Chowk, Yavatmal-445 001. Pan : Abcpb5111C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri P.M. Gandhi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :17.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2022

Capital Gain (LTCG) of Rs. 14.75 lac on sale of one lac shares of M/s Comfort Intech Ltd., a penny stock

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), NAGPUR vs. SHRI SUDHIR RAMSWAROOP SARDA , NAGPUR

penny stock\ncompany, does not have any worthwhile asset, creditworthy business, strong\nfinancials or any other indicator to justify its soaring share prices which has\nbeen manipulated to give accommodation entries in the form of bogus long\nterm capital gains

BHAVIKA GUNWANT PATEL,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

penny stock company listed with BSE with script code (517356). This company used to facilitate introduction of unaccounted income of members of beneficiaries in the form of exempt capital gain

VISHNUKUMAR RAMSWAROOP AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-4(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad

capital gain (LTCG) u/s. 10(38) of the Act. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee referring to the plethora of decisions of the coordinate benches as well as Hon'ble High Courts submitted that the genuineness of gain/loss from sale of equity shares of M/s. Kappac Pharma Ltd. has come up for consideration before