“investigation wing”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 14712,584 judgments

The decision most relied on for investigation wing is PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (396 ITR 5), cited in 272 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on investigation wing

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.

396 ITR 5 · 2017 · High Court

272

citing judgments

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. v. DCIT

293 ITR 43 · 2007 · High Court

264

citing judgments

Where an assessment order is merely a copy-paste of observations from an investigation wing's appraisal report without independent verification, it is not a valid basis for making additions to income.

Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

329 ITR 110 · 2010 · High Court

217

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid if the Assessing Officer records satisfaction based on borrowed satisfaction or information without independently applying their mind and forming their own 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment. The AO must arrive at an independent conclusion, not merely act on a report from an investigation wing without due diligence.

ITO, 19(3) (4) Mumbai v. Shamim M Bharwani

69 Taxmann.com 65 · 2016 · Reported

142

citing judgments

Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) from penny stock transactions are liable to be treated as bogus and added back under Section 68 as unexplained cash credits, especially when evidence suggests the involvement of entry operators providing accommodation entries.

1. Harikishan S. Virmani v. DCIT

394 ITR 146 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under section 147 cannot be initiated by the Assessing Officer based on borrowed satisfaction, vague information from the Investigation Wing, or incorrect jurisdictional facts without independent application of mind. Reopening beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, especially where an original assessment was completed under section 143(3), requires specific conditions relating to the assessee's failure to disclose material facts.

ITO v. Purushottam Das Bangur

224 ITR 362 · 1997 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Information received from the investigation wing constitutes valid 'reason to believe' for initiating reassessment proceedings under Sections 147/148, provided the Assessing Officer applies their mind to the material and does not act mechanically. Prompt issuance of a notice based on such information does not automatically imply a lack of due diligence or borrowed satisfaction.

AGR Investment v. Additional Commissioner

197 Taxmann 177 · 2011 · High Court

citing judgments

A reassessment under Section 147/148 is valid if initiated based on specific, non-vague information, even from an investigation wing, provided the Assessing Officer applies independent mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment.

56 (Guj.) (para 6) v. Aaspas Multimedia Ltd. v. Dy. CIT

83 Taxmann.com 82 · 2017 · High Court

citing judgments

Information received from the Investigation Wing, identifying the assessee as a beneficiary of accommodation entries through share application from a third party, constitutes valid tangible material and 'reasons to believe' for initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

Judgments citing investigation wing

Dhanman Jewells Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 950/KOL/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: The Itat With The Following Grounds:

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 65Section 68

dated 20.12.2017 passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act when the jurisdiction to reassess the income has been assumed on the information received from Investigation Wing without application of independent mind by the Assessing Officer in examining the information rather than accepting the information as gospel truth. 7. That

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. M/S Purple Suppliers Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/86/2025HC Calcutta04 Jul 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

escaped assessment as assessee was beneficiary of accommodation entries and the basis for formation of such belief were several inquiries and investigation by the investigation Wing that there had been escapement of income of the assessee from assessment because of his failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts ... selected for scrutiny and assessments were framed under section 143(3) of the Act. It appears that the Assessing Officer receiving information from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai about suspicious business activities of M/s. Sancheti Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘Sancheti’) which was having huge turnover but declared meager

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. M/S Purple Suppliers Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed and the substantial

ITAT/84/2025HC Calcutta04 Jul 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A

ACIT-3, Lucknow vs. Harshit Garg, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department in ITA No

ITA 451/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Acit, Lucknow Vs. Harshit Garg, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57-Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow Pan: Aiopg3763A (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.25/Lkw/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Harshit Garg, Vs. Acit, Lucknow Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57- Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow Pan: Aiopg3763A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Akshay Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.07.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: [ This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 17.06.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Partly Allowed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Ao

For Appellant: Sh. Akshay Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. CIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250Section 37Section 68

bank 6 CO No.25/LKW/2024 Harshit Garg account out of his sales. In view of the enquiry made by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department and pressure applied by them, he made the declaration under PMGKY to purchase peace and it was advised to him at that time that

Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Root & Seed Organic Private Limited, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 968/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 68

cash credit u/s.68 of the Act despite the fact that: - (i) There were discrepancies in cash book submitted by assessee company during enquiry before investigation wing and during assessment proceeding & various discrepancy were noticed in copy of invoices submitted, weigh bridge receipts and delivery challans etc. during the course ... Hargovind Singh, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that there were discrepancies in the cash book submitted by the assessee company during enquiry before the Investigation Wing and during the assessment proceedings and various other discrepancies were also noticed in the copy of invoice, weigh bridge receipts and the delivery challans

Incometax Officer Ward-3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Deepa Rajendrakumar Agrawal, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2206/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151

order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B made aby AO by stating that no new credible/tangible materials on record is brought by AO without appreciating that the Investigation Wing of the Department has already investigated the issue ITA Nos.2205 & 2206/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) ITO vs. Deepa Rajendrakumar Agrawal Page

Incometax Officer Ward 3(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Deepa Rajendrakumar Agrawal, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2205/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 151

DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Kalpana Madhani Securities Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 3846/MUM/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhandcit-14(1)(1) M/S. Kalpana Madhani R. No. 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Securities Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 11/1102, Shanti Tower, Shanti Mumbai-400 020 Path, Near Garodia Nagar, Mumbai-400 077 Pan: Aabck2968H

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 250Section 73

wrongly rejected the objections against issue of notice. In this regard, it is seen that the AO was having concrete information received from the investigation wing after thorough enquiry. Also, it is evident that all the objections of the appellant are considered and the AO has passed a speaking order

DCIT-1(1), Bhilai vs. Vijaya Deshlahra, Indore

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

ITA 94/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68

claimed exemption of long-term capital gains u/s. 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”). In this case, Investigation Wing, Mumbai made some enquiries on the penny stock cases, who are indulged in converting black money into white money by way of claiming exempted long ... term capital gains u/s.10(38) of the Act. The Investigation Wing briefly explained the modus operandi on the ground that usually, beneficiaries buy the penny stocks and thereafter 4 ITA.Nos.92-94/RPR/2025 COs No.08-10/RPR/2025 approach certain mediators, and through them the share prices would be rigged and artificially increased

DCIT-1(1), Bhilai vs. Vijaya Deshlahra, Indore

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

ITA 93/RPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68

DCIT-1(1), Bhilai vs. Vijaya Deshlahra, Indore

In the result, ITA No. 92/RPR/2025 & C

ITA 92/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, CIT-DR

Section 10(38)Section 148Section 68

Paresh Dayashankar Madeka, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 343/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

case was reopened u/s. 148 was on 25.03.2012 that the assessee on the basis of report that the investigation wing and recorded statement of one Shri Prakasjh Bagrecha wherein director admitted that company in engaged in the business of invest in share and finance activity and involved in providing ... reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer on 17.07.2017. Further, submitted that the assessment has been reopened on account of information received from the investigation wing. That during the course of assessment proceeding, the assessee has also submitted: 1. Acknowledgment of return of income of M/s. Bhumidev Credit Corporation

Shafi Ahamed, Kanpur vs. ACIT, CC-1, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 231/LKW/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2021-22 Shafi Ahamed V. The Acit 133/194 ‘O’ Block Central Circle 1 Sabzi Mandi Kanpur Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Alhpa0988P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R

Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)

Rehan Khan, were travelling and found and seized from them cash of ITA No.231/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 7 Rs.12,00,000/-. Subsequently, the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department at Kanpur recorded statement of Mr. Fuzail Zameer, who stated on oath that the owner of the said cash ... Potatoes. Thereafter, the assessee also stated on oath that the aforesaid cash belonged to him. Subsequently, the aforesaid cash was requisitioned by the Investigation Wing under section 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’). Since the assessee failed to explain the nature and source

Shiv Asrey Singh, Kanpur vs. Dy.CIT-2, Kanpur

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 579/LKW/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2012-13 Shiv Asrey Singh V. The Dcit-2 Sb-17, Sbi Colony Kanpur Ratanlal Nagar Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aizps6999M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R

Section 10(38)Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

noted that even if the Department was acting on the basis of information received from ITA No.579/LKW/2024 Page 9 of 10 DDIT of Investigation Wing, the assessee was never confronted with any such report and neither was it revealed to the assessee whether or not his name appeared in that

Share Microfin Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 448/HYD/2023[Assessment Year 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.448/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Share Microfin Ltd Vs. Dy.Cit Hyderabad Circle 3 ( 1 ) Pan:Aaecs9243C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Cas Shri K.C.Devdas & Shanker राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 05/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 03/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: CAs Shri K.C.Devdas & ShankerFor Respondent: : Shri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT (DR)

Section 69

procedure in respect of the deposits of SBNs in the banks. The learned AR has pointed out that prior to the assessement proceedings, the Investigation Wing has also conducted a proper investigation and inquiry about the SBN deposits in the bank account and no adverse finding was given ... Investigation Wing after conducting the said investigation in the case of the assessee. The assessee produced all the relevant details including the month- wise recoveries and loan advances by the assessee as well as the deposits in the bank account during the year as well as the 3 preceding years

ITO-19(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Narendra K Rawal(HUF), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of

ITA 6537/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Ito – 19(2)(4), Narendra K Rawal (Huf) 507, 5Th Floor Piramal Vs 54/3 479, Jariwala Building, Arther Road, Chambers, Parel Tardeo, Mumbai – 400034. Mumbai Mumbai – 400034. [Pan: Aachn4321B] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

Section 144Section 148Section 254(1)

statement is the basis of making entire addition. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of assessee and the report of investigation wing prepared in case of Vipul Bhatt. considered 1.00 % of aggregate of accommodation entry as a reasonable income and thereby restricted the addition to the extent

Eastern and Western Dresses Trading Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-8(1), New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1939/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Income Tax Officer, M/S. Eastern & Western Dresses Trading Pvt. Ltd., Ward-8(1), No. 7, Shankar Vihar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabce5153G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 68

justified.[ S.133(6)] Allowing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that; evidence was collected in the course of search proceedings by the Investigation Wing it was found that companies were not carrying on any genuine business activities. Directors of these companies were employees of Mr Tarun Goyal

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-7 vs. M/S Thomson Press (India) Ltd

ITA/192/2025HC Delhi02 Jul 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260ASection 50C

addition of Rs. 20 Crores made on account of Capital Gains u/s 50C of the Act on the basis of the information received from Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department, Noida? B. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT is justified in giving

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-7 vs. M/S Thomson Press (India) Ltd

ITA - 192 / 2025HC Delhi02 Jul 2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260ASection 50C

Barun Kumar Chand, Bhadrak vs. The Income Tax Officer, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 230/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Barun Kumar Chand, At-College Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhadrak Road, Jagannathpur, Dist: Ward, Bhadrak Bhadrak-756100 Pan/Gir No. Adppc 8074 Q (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kr Chakdraborty, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02//07/2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ashim kr Chakdraborty, CIT DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

year 2016-17 in 29.7.2016 disclosing total income of Rs.2,66,228.00 under the head “income from other sources”. It was unearthed from the investigation wing of the department that the assessee has made substantial cash deposit of Rs.37,33,000/- and has not disclosed the income amounting to Rs.9