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

price was paid by cheque and respondent's bank account has\nbeen debited. The shares were also transferred into respondent's Demat\naccount where it remained for more than one year. After a period of one\nyear the shares were sold by the said broker on various dates in the\nKolkata Stock Exchange. Pursuant to sale of shares the said

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

price was paid by cheque and respondent's bank account has\nbeen debited. The shares were also transferred into respondent's Demat\naccount where it remained for more than one year. After a period of one\nyear the shares were sold by the said broker on various dates in the\nKolkata Stock Exchange. Pursuant to sale of shares the said

AMIT BHASKARRAO SANAP,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -3, , AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.78/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Amit Bhaskarrao Sanap, The Assistant A-2, N-4, Cidco, Aurangabad, Vs Commissioner Of Income Maharashtra – 431001. Tax, Circle-3, Aurangabad. Pan: Auips 4177 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe & Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 25/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 19/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Aurangabad, Dated 13.11.2018 For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner (A), Aurangabad Confirming The Addition Of Rs.1,93.17.241/- Made By The A.O. In Computing The Income U/S 56 Instead Of Exempt U S. 10(38) Of The Act Of The Appellant Is Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case.

stock exchange through controlled transaction of these shares during all the time. When desired time period (12 month) and desired price are achieved. Mr. Jagdish Purohit again makes arrangement to purchase those shares from shareholders on very high price high through his managed share purchasers. In this way initial share purchaser earn huge exempted LTCG on share sale

SARIKA AMIT SANAP,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 3,, AURANGABAD

In the result, assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

penny stock shares coated on BSE. During the investigation, it also recorded statements of concerned persons/directors of said companies U/s 131 of the Act whereby it was established that the shares of said companies were rigged up/manipulated for generating huge profit or losses, as per the requirements of the clients. The operator also controlled numerous paper/bogus companies which were utilized

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE vs. RAKESH MOTILAL SHARMA,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2123 & 2124/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Penny Stock frauds perpetrated by the assessee in connivance with the cartel. The AO in para 14.4 of the assessment order held that the financial crime are not committed at spur of the movement but they are executed as a result of well plan strategy after considering various aspect and legal obligations of all Stake holders. Hence, the paper formalities

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 5,, PUNE vs. RAKESH MOTILAL SHARMA,, PUNE

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2123 & 2124/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15

Penny Stock frauds perpetrated by the assessee in connivance with the cartel. The AO in para 14.4 of the assessment order held that the financial crime are not committed at spur of the movement but they are executed as a result of well plan strategy after considering various aspect and legal obligations of all Stake holders. Hence, the paper formalities

SONAL ASHISH SHAH,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2541/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15

penny stock issued by SEBI, confirmed the addition under the head “Income from other sources” as against ‘unexplained cash credit’ made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal assailing the impugned order passed by ld.CIT(A). 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the detailed paper book running into

ITO, NASHIK vs. ANKIT NARESH TULSIAN, NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

price fluctuation to stock was\nbeyond her control.\n6.6 The Ld. AO has made the adjustment by forming opinion on\nsearch conducted by some other assessee. He has not\nperformed due diligence in specific to the appellant's case LING\n6.7 The Ld. AO has not mentioned any shortcoming in broker\nnotes, bank payments and other supporting documents filed

SHABEENALRFAN HINGORA,,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, JALNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

transferred by M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd.. As per the SEBI’s website, the said company, M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd. was one of the delisted company since long. The share value went up substantially and it is to the benefit of the assessee. Assessee sold these shares and the gains were claimed exempt. Considering the Penny

SHAMIMLMTIAZ HINGORA,,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, JALNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

transferred by M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd.. As per the SEBI’s website, the said company, M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd. was one of the delisted company since long. The share value went up substantially and it is to the benefit of the assessee. Assessee sold these shares and the gains were claimed exempt. Considering the Penny

PARVEZ HINGORA,,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, JALNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

transferred by M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd.. As per the SEBI’s website, the said company, M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd. was one of the delisted company since long. The share value went up substantially and it is to the benefit of the assessee. Assessee sold these shares and the gains were claimed exempt. Considering the Penny

ARIF ABDUL RAZAK HINGORA,,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, JALNA

In the result, all the four appeals of the respective assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

transferred by M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd.. As per the SEBI’s website, the said company, M/s. Tohee Trading & Agencies Pvt. Ltd. was one of the delisted company since long. The share value went up substantially and it is to the benefit of the assessee. Assessee sold these shares and the gains were claimed exempt. Considering the Penny

DINESHKUMAR RAMCHANDRA TULSYAN (HUF),,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5),, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15 Dineshkumar Ramchandra Tulsyan (Huf) Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Aachd5953R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Sumandevi Dineshkumar Tulsyan Ito, Ward 1(5), 214B, Laxmi Niwas, Mahatma Nagar, Vs. Nashik Nashik – 422007 Pan: Ackpt1322Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

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

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

penny stock of shares of Ramkrishna Fincap Ltd (“RFL”) is done\nthrough stock exchange and through the registered Stock Brokers. The\npayments have been made through banking channels and even Security\nTransaction Tax (“STT”) has also been paid. The Assessing Officer also\nhas not criticized the documentation involving the sale and purchase of\nshares. The Tribunal has also come

KALAVATHI DEVI SHARMA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, NANDED, NANDED

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

Penny Stock company, notice u/s.148 of the Act issued to the assessee on 18.05.2021 and thereafter in compliance to the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India & Ors Vs. Ashish Agarwal and other in Civil appeal No.3005/2022 dated 04.05.2022 show cause notice u/s.148A(b) was issued and thereafter necessary formalities carried out and finally

DNYANDEO LAXMAN RAJALE,,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.80/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dnyandeo Laxman Rajale, Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Plot No.349, Growth Centre, Aurangabad. Mahanagar-1, Midc, Waluj, Aurangabad- 431136. Pan : Aaqpr2829E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)- 2, Aurangabad’S Order Dated 29.11.2018 Passed In Case No. Abd/Cit(A)- 2/377/2016-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenges Correctness Of Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Denying Section 10(38) Long Term Capital Gains’ Exemption Thereby

penny stock company and the assessee obtained only accommodation entries in the garb of long term capital gain from transfer of its shares, for which an appropriate addition has rightly been made and upheld by the authorities below. My view is fortified by the judgment dated 10.4.2017 of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Sanjay Bimalchand Jain

AKSHAY A. CHOURE,,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (1),, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1168/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

penny stock company and the assessee obtained only accommodation entries in the garb of long term capital gain from transfer of its shares, for which an appropriate addition has rightly been made and upheld by the authorities below. My view is fortified by the judgment dated 10.4.2017 of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Sanjay Bimalchand Jain

JAYSHREE ASHOK CHOURE,,AURANGABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, AURANGABAD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara

penny stock company and the assessee obtained only accommodation entries in the garb of long term capital gain from transfer of its shares, for which an appropriate addition has rightly been made and upheld by the authorities below. My view is fortified by the judgment dated 10.4.2017 of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Sanjay Bimalchand Jain