DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

section 68 on\nthe ground that the assessee invested in shares of penny stock companies which\nprovided bogus long term capital gain, since the assessee failed to establish the\ngenuniness of rise of price of shares within a short

SANGEETA BASAVRAJ MANGRULE,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

section 68 is called for. Since the assessee has placed the contract note, payment through cheques identifying the company whose shares were transacted, the genuineness of claim of long term capital gain should not have been doubted. We do not find merit in these contentions of the assessee in the light of the facts that there is prevalent practice

JAIBHAGWAN BANARASIDAS JINDAL,JALNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. YICL was incorporated in January, 1983 as an unlisted company under the name of Yamini Investments Company Ltd. and subsequently converted into public limited company and listed on BSE in January, 1984. The trading of equity shares in the scrip was earlier suspended and the suspension was revoked w.e.f

HREYANSH VASUNDHARA FAMILY TRUST,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 2(290) denotes two separate levies and hence MMR does not automatically include higher rate of surcharge. 5. In not appreciating that the total income of the appellant of Rs.18,86,13,290/- includes income of Rs.18,52,68,427/-on which maximum surcharge is 15 per cent (viz. short-term capital gains

HREYANSH VASUNDHARA FAMILY TRUST,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

section 2(290) denotes two separate levies and hence MMR does not automatically include higher rate of surcharge. 5. In not appreciating that the total income of the appellant of Rs.18,86,13,290/- includes income of Rs.18,52,68,427/-on which maximum surcharge is 15 per cent (viz. short-term capital gains

RAMESH G PORWAL,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

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

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

section 111A for transactions entered into after 01.10.2004 i.e. the date on which Chapter VII of the Finance Act 2004 came into force. There are certain other issues, as pointed out by the Assessing Officer, which should not be lost sight of and are relevant for deciding the issue. The appellant has taken full advantage of business losses

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 68 on the ground that the assessee invested in shares of penny stock companies which provided bogus long term capital gain, since the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of rise of price of shares within a short

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 68 on the ground that the assessee invested in shares of penny stock companies which provided bogus long term capital gain, since the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of rise of price of shares within a short

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGAON vs. SIDHARTH RATANLAL BAFNA, JALGAON

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

section 68 on the ground that the assessee invested in shares of penny stock companies which provided bogus long term capital gain, since the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of rise of price of shares within a short

POONAWALLA SHARES & SECURITIES PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

short “the Act”]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee’s first and foremost substantive ground raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the lower authorities ITA No.380/PUN/2020 for A.Y. 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Pune (A) action invoking section 14A r.w.Rule 8D disallowance of Rs.10

SMT. SUMANDEVI DINESHKUMAR TULSYAN,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, NASHIK

section 143(3) dated 28/12/2016 passed by\nthe Assessing Officer is bad in law and the Commissioner of Income\nTax(Appeals)-1. Nashik has erred in confirming the same.\n8.\nThe Assessee appeals to grant any relief that may be due to the Assessee\nunder the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n9.\nThe appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1, , NASHIK vs. SMT. PRIYA K. JAGTIYANI, LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI KISHOR C. JAGTIYANI, NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.336/Pun/2016 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Circle – 1, Nashik …. Vs. Smt. Priya K. Jagtiyani L/H Of Late Kishor Chelaram Jagtiyani Office No.1, Shalimar Towers, Shalimar Chowk, Shivaji Road, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Nashik – 422001 Pan: Adepj7743C

short term capital gains at ₹ 6,68,958/-. The Assessing Officer noted that the stamp duty valuation of Basement sold was ₹ 1.44 crores as against the sale value declared by assessee at ₹ 66,51,000/- and observed that the difference of ₹ 78,02,000/- was taxable under section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. PRAMILA OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. The assessee Shri Ashish Omprakash Mantri was one such beneficiary and the amount involved in his case is Rs.1,60,30,716/-. 5. After receiving the above information, the Assessing Officer carried out investigations and found that the share price of the above company i.e. NITSL rose from Rs.39

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. The assessee Shri Ashish Omprakash Mantri was one such beneficiary and the amount involved in his case is Rs.1,60,30,716/-. 5. After receiving the above information, the Assessing Officer carried out investigations and found that the share price of the above company i.e. NITSL rose from Rs.39

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. The assessee Shri Ashish Omprakash Mantri was one such beneficiary and the amount involved in his case is Rs.1,60,30,716/-. 5. After receiving the above information, the Assessing Officer carried out investigations and found that the share price of the above company i.e. NITSL rose from Rs.39

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ATUL OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. The assessee Shri Ashish Omprakash Mantri was one such beneficiary and the amount involved in his case is Rs.1,60,30,716/-. 5. After receiving the above information, the Assessing Officer carried out investigations and found that the share price of the above company i.e. NITSL rose from Rs.39

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. ASHISH OMPRAKASH MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. The assessee Shri Ashish Omprakash Mantri was one such beneficiary and the amount involved in his case is Rs.1,60,30,716/-. 5. After receiving the above information, the Assessing Officer carried out investigations and found that the share price of the above company i.e. NITSL rose from Rs.39

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, JALNA vs. OMPRAKASH ASARAM MANTRI, JALNA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

short term capital loss in their books of accounts. The assessee Shri Ashish Omprakash Mantri was one such beneficiary and the amount involved in his case is Rs.1,60,30,716/-. 5. After receiving the above information, the Assessing Officer carried out investigations and found that the share price of the above company i.e. NITSL rose from Rs.39