BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

4 results for “transfer pricing”+ Penny Stockclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai371Delhi171Chennai95Kolkata85Ahmedabad64Jaipur59Indore53Calcutta35Chandigarh32Hyderabad29Cuttack23Pune23Bangalore20Guwahati19Surat18Rajkot16Nagpur10Lucknow10Amritsar6Patna5Varanasi5Raipur4Jodhpur2Visakhapatnam2Karnataka1Agra1Orissa1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)4Section 10(38)4Section 143(3)3Penny Stock3Long Term Capital Gains3Capital Gains2Exemption2Addition to Income2

DCIT,1(1), RAIPUR (CG) vs. SMT VIMLESH KUMAR SINGH, RAIPUR (CG)

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 21/BIL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member Dcit-1(1), Raipur Vs Late Shri Vijay Pal Singh, Through L/H Smt. Vimlesh Kumari Singh, Prop.M/S Manohar Engineering & M/S Sharda Engineering, Baikunth, District – Raipur Pan No. : Ahjps 0124 K (Appellant) .. Tsednepser Revenue By : Mrs. Shital Verma, Dr Assessee By : Shri K.P.Dewani, Ar Date Of Hearing : 10/01/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 15/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Raipur, Dated 08.02.2013 For The Assessment Year 2006-2007. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- “1. Whether In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,98,28,636/- Made By The Ao By Treating Long Term Capital Gain As Income From Undisclosed Sources.” 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Ao Observed That The Shares On Sale Of Which Ltcg Of Rs.1.95,39,611/- Was Shown & Exemption U/S.10(38) Of The Act Was Claimed Were Held Barely For Little More Than One Year To Qualify The Same As Long Term Capital Asset. The Cost Of The Shares Was Rs.2,69,400/- & Sale Consideration Was Rs.1,98,28,636/-. He

For Appellant: Shri K.P.Dewani, ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Shital Verma, DR
Section 10(38)

penny stocks. The assessee has claimed to have purchased the shares from Prince Securities whereas the shares were sold to Prakash Nahata & Co., stock and share brokers having their office at Kolkata. The transaction of purchase was off market, which was not reported on the recognized stock exchange i.e. Bombay Stock Exchange. The transaction was arranged in such

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. MANISH KUMAR MEHTA, HUF, DURG

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 342/RPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.342/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Manish Kumar Mehta Opportunity. Swami Atmanand English Medium School, Krishna Talkies Road, Risali, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 006 Pan: Aahhm3766Q ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Bakliwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

penny stocks which were used for accommodation entries by the alleged stock brokers and entry operators by rigging for illegal price - hiking through syridicate trading. It was observed that large amounts were credited/deposited mainly in the cash and bank accounts of the concerns i.e. Riddhi Siddhi Enterprises, S.D Trading Co, Gupta Enterprises, Jaiswal Trading , Rohan Singh which was subsequently transferred

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. AJAY GOLECHAA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 454/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.454/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

penny stock (NCL Research and Financial Services Ltd.) were found to be non- genuine and were used as a colorable device to convert unaccounted money into tax-exempt income, which clearly amounts to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 5. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the penalty was wrongly levied despite clear satisfaction recorded

THE DY. CIT-1(1),, RAIPUR (CG) vs. RAKESH SARAOGI & SONI (HUF),, RAIPUR (CG)

ITA 93/BIL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Apr 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Ram Lal Negi)

Section 143(3)

price list itself could be the subject matter of cross-examination. Therefore, it was not for the Adjudicating Authority to presuppose as to what could be the subject matter of the cross-examination and make the remarks as mentioned above. We may also point out that on an earlier occasion when the matter came before this Court in Civil Appeal