TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Results on search of LTCG related cases before the Supreme Court,
it is seen that in most of cases in which claim is supported by documents, banking and DP transactions have been decided in favour of assessee, in spite of some investigation reports and verbal statements of alleged entry operators.
Facts and allegations of department were similar as we can find on reading of related judgments of HC and ITAT.
Now department has started withdrawal of SLP - order in case of PCIT Vs. Bindu Garg is found and list of tagged case is also found but order is not available on website of the Supreme Court.
Search results on this website:
Showing Results for : Law: Income Tax Courts: Supreme Court - All Sort : default Search In : Main Text + AI Text
Searched Text : LTCG on penny
Law: Income Tax Courts: Supreme Court - All Sort : default Search In : Main Text + AI Text
Searched Text : capital gains penny stock
Showing Results for : Law: Income TaxCourts: Supreme Court - All, Party Name: Mohapatra
Law: Income Tax Courts: Supreme Court - All Sort : default Search In : Main Text + AI LTCGText
Searched Text : LTCG
And after search author filtered from the search for cases related to alleged bogus LTCG on penny stock in original assessment, some reassessment and search cases.
Some cases found in search related to prosecution, penalty and other issues not connected with allowability of LTCG as genuine and exempted u.s. 10.38. These have not been included in this write-up, as not related to issue of exemption.
Only orders of SC related to exemption u.s. 10.38, alleged by department as bogus are appended below. Related judgments of HC,and ITAT are available in links provided with judgment.
No.- Special Leave Petition (Civil) 16892/2026 @ Diary No(s). 23191/2026
Dated:- May 8, 2026
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Versus Sanjaykumar Damjibhai Gangani.
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue and having gone through the materials on record, we find no good ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.
3. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
4. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central II Versus Dinesh Gupta.
No.- Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 4234/2026
Dated:- February 9, 2026
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
3. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed and the accompanying interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 13 Kolkata Versus Pradip Kumar Jajodia (HUF).
No.- Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(S). 13533/2026 [@Diary No. 15728/2026]
Dated:- April 15, 2026
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. We do not find a good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the special leave petition is dismissed.
3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Vikram Knittex Pvt. Ltd.
No.- Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 57752/2025
Dated:- November 21, 2025
ORDER
1. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.
2. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Versus Damodar Jajoo
No.- Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 1144/2025 @D. No. 57702/2024
Dated:- January 10, 2025
ORDER
1. Delay condoned.
2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and having gone through the materials on record, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.
3. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
4. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus BULBUL AGRAWAL
No.- Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 26629 / 2023
Dated:- February 19, 2025
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
After having heard learned counsel appearing for petitioner and after perusing the finding of facts recorded by the Tribunal in paragraph 14 and 15 of its judgment which has been confirmed by the High Court, we find no case for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1 Versus HIMANSHU MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 34106/2024
Dated:- September 9, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
There is a delay of 449 days in filing the special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay. Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed keeping open the question of law, if any.
Pending application(s) stand disposed of.
The aforesaid order is passed following the order passed by this Court on 23.02.2024, in Special Leave Petition (C) D. No.5706/2024 (PR. Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 Vs. Anupama Mohapatra).
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 1 Versus SITANSU SEKHAR MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 11963/2024
Dated:- April 29, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
There is gross delay of 309 days in filing the special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay. Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed keeping open the question of law, if any. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 Versus SITANSU SEKHAR MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 11918/2024
Dated:- April 10, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
There is gross delay of 309 days in filing this special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay.
Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed keeping open the question of law, if any.
In doing so, we have also followed the earlier order of this Court dated 01.03.2024 passed in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 vs. Dipansu Mohapatra in SLP(C) Dy. No.5854/2024.
Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of.
THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, ORISSA Versus KISHORE KUMAR MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 10281/2024
Dated:- April 5, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner.
Delay condoned.
No case for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Pending application also stands disposed of.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I Versus ANUPAMA MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 10984/2024
Dated:- April 1, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
There is gross delay of 303 days in filing this special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay.
Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed keeping open the question of law, if any.
In doing so, we have also followed the earlier order of this Court dated 01.03.2024 passed in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Vs. Dipansu Mohapatra in SLP (C) Dy No.5854/2024.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus DEEPANSU MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 10128/2024 SLP(C) Dy No. 10275/2024
Dated:- March 19, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
SLP(C) Dy. No.10128/2024 : [2023 (2) TMI 392 - ORISSA HIGH COURT]
There is gross delay of 298 days in filing this special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay.
Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed, keeping open the question of law, if any.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
SLP(C) Dy. No.10275/2024 : [2023 (2) TMI 392 - ORISSA HIGH COURT]
There is gross delay of 300 days in filing this special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay.
Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed, keeping open the question of law, if any.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 Versus KUNTALA MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 5269/2024
Dated:- March 4, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
Delay condoned.
Heard the learned Additional Solicitor General.
We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. Hence, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1 Versus DIPANSU MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 5854/2024 Diary No(s). 8328/2024 (XI - A) SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 4888/2024
Dated:- March 1, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
There is gross delay of 273 days, 288 days and 267 days in filing the special leave petitions. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay. Hence, the applications seeking condonation of delay are dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petitions are also dismissed keeping open the question of law, if any.
Pending applications stand disposed of.
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 Versus ANUPAMA MOHAPATRA
No.- SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) DIARY NO(S). 5706/2024
Dated:- February 23, 2024
ORDER
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following.
There is gross delay of 272 days in filing the special leave petition. The explanation offered is not sufficient in law to condone the delay. Hence, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.
Consequently, the special leave petition is also dismissed keeping open the question of law, if any.
Pending application(s) stand disposed of.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 Versus PARASBEN KASTURCHAND KOCHAR
No.- Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 6782/2021
Dated:- August 2, 2021
ORDER
We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
PRINCIPAL COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 12 Versus KRISHNA DEVI
No.- Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 4068/2022
Dated:- April 1, 2022
ORDER
Issue notice.
Dasti, in addition.
Tag with SLP(C) No. 419 of 2022.
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 12 Versus BINDU GARG - 2026 (7) TMI 54 - SC Order
List of large number of cases above 50 tagged is also available, however, order is not yet available.