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

penny stock of shares of Ramkrishna Fincap Ltd. ("RFL") is done through stock exchange and through the registered Stock Brokers. The payments have been made through banking channels and even Security Transaction Tax ("STT") has also been paid. The Assessing Officer also has not criticized the documentation involving the sale and purchase of shares. The Tribunal has also come

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

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 to beneficiaries. ix) On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate

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 to beneficiaries. ix) On the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate

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:

transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price through preferential allotment or off-line sales and the prices of these shares are rigged by the dummy operators. 2 ACIT, CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR VS SHRI VINOD BALBHADRA GOENKA iii. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the findings of the SEBI, holding that SEBI orders are against companies

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

prices were artificially rigged. Thus, it was observed by the assessing officer that Esaar (India) Ltd. is a penny stock and used across to give accommodation entries to earn capital gain. v) During the course of investigation conducted at Kolkata, in the case of the assessee, it was found that certain exit operators have admitted that they were involved

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 for obtaining bogus LTCG as in the assessee’s case. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that the fundamentals of the M/s. GCM Securities do not corroborate with the instant hike in the price

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 for obtaining bogus LTCG as in the assessee’s case. 3. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that the fundamentals of the M/s. GCM Securities do not corroborate with the instant hike in the price of its shares

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

transferred to the share brokers and ultimately used for purchase of shares by various brokers / companies. On the basis of such observation, the AO treated the transaction of both the long term capital gain as sham transaction and aggregate of both the long term capital gains of Rs. 18.84 crore was treated income from undisclosed sources in the assessment order