“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

ACIT -3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Asia Polytex (India) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6922/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, (Sr. DR)

Section 147Section 148Section 41(1)Section 68

case are that the assessee had not filed the ROI for the AY 2011-12. In this case, the ld.Assessing Officer received information from Investigation wing, Mumbai as per which the assessee had executed one time settlement (OTS) with Allahabad Bank and there was settlement in respect of loans

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ankur Agrawal, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

ITA 5179/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, () & Shri Prabhash Shankar, ()

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 68

Thus, the sum and substance of the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court was that mere reliance on the report of the investigation wing without further corroboration does not justify the conclusion of treating the transaction as bogus and sham. The relevant part of the decision ... under Section 10(38), in a preplanned manner to evade taxes. The AO extensively relied upon the search and survey operations conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business

ACIT, Circle, Mumbai, Piramal Chamber vs. Abhishek Rajendrakumar Mundra, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3929/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 3929/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Acit, Circle, Mumbai V/S. Abhishek Rajendrakumar 601, 6Th Floor, Piramal बिाम Mundra Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, C-28, Ameya Building, Mumbai-400012 Behind Ymca, Dn Nagar, Po Azad Nagar, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpm5067H Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी प्रनि आपत्ति सुं./ Co No. 100/Mum/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3929/Mum/2024) (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Abhishek Rajendrakumar V/S. Acit, Circle, Mumbai बिाम Mundra 601, 6Th Floor, Piramal C-28, Ameya Building, Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Behind Ymca, Dn Nagar, Mumbai-400012 Po Azad Nagar, Andheri West, Mumbai-400053 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpm5067H Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 68

made by the AO without appreciating the facts of the case and modus operandi as a detailed investigation has been carried out by the Investigation Wing in the scrip of M/s Yamini Investment Company Limited where the assessee name has been surfaced and a detailed finding has been given ... Investigation Wing. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO without appreciating the facts that in such penny scrip, trading transactions of purchase and sales are not affected for commercial purpose

Aura Gold Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(4), Delhi

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

ITA 2435/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Aura Gold Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Shop No.2, First Floor, Ward-3(4), 1164, Kucha Mahajani, Vs Room No.381, C.R. Building, Chandni Chowk, New Delhi-110002 Delhi-110006 Pan-Aaica9325K Assessee Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

high value of cash transaction in the account in short period and usage of account for parking of funds lead to suspicion. The Investigation Wing issued summons to the PAM jewelers Pvt. Ltd., for explaining the source of credit and nature and purpose of debit in respect of bank account ... will be filing the relevant details at the earliest but no details were filed after that. 3.1. Further, summons were also issued by the Investigation Wing to the various other parties, including M/s Aura Gold Pvt. Ltd., having bank account no 13805500015, which was linked to the bank account

ACIT 2 2 1, Mumbai vs. Jyoti Structures Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2661/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. D/R

Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 234CSection 68

despite the fact that assessing officer is in receipt of information that Shri. Santosh Vasantrao Khasare admitted in the statement recorded by the Investigation Wing, Nagpur on 23.11.2012 & 07.12.2012 that the bank account of ICICI Bank, Ahmadnagar was opened by employees of M/s. Jyoti Structures Ltd. i.e. Sudipto Chattergee ... contractor work for M/s JSL for which cheque payments were made by the company to him. Statements of Shri Khasare was recorded by the Investigation Wing. Nagpur on 23.11.2012 & 07.12.2012, where he has categorically stated that bank account bearing no. 645801502040 of ICICI Bank. Savedi Brach, Ahmednagar was opened

Goldstar Metal Solutions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-9(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2084/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Kabra, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. D/R

Section 143(3)Section 148

seen that the above mentioned companies have already been identified as shell companies during various search and survey operation conducted by the investigation wing from which funds are reaching to the accounts of beneficiaries directly or through other paper companies or have been used for providing accommodation entry

Vidarbha Mining Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1266/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Kabra, A/RFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. D/R

Section 143(3)Section 148

News Builders and Developers Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 1769/DEL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganeshnews Builders & Developers Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt Ltd, Ward-18(2), 1St Floor, Property No. 1, Delhi Khasra No. 619/7, Opposite Tivoli Garden, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaccn4173E

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Chawla, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

deed writer and an advocate by profession. The said letter also informed about the page No. 80 of the appraisal report received from Investigation Wing that during the FY 2008-09, the assessee company has paid cash amounting to Rs. 1 crore to Shri Birkhe, Shri Mahabir Singh, Ms. Neetu

Income Tax Officer-3(1), Kanpur vs. Shri Arvind Kumar Gupta, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal is held to be allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 174/LKW/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SH.KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 268A

assessment. The ld. CIT(A) observed that there was no mentioning of the share broker M/s India Infoline Limited in the report of the Investigation Wing. He acknowledged that there was a reference in the report to the scrip of M/s Kailash Auto Finance Limited but there was no evidence ... effort made by the ld. AO to understand the factual position in the case of the assessee by examining anyone who admitted before the Investigation Wing that they were manipulating LTCG transactions. He had not made any effort to verify the documents placed by the assessee and since specific adverse

The Commissioner Ocf Income Tax-I vs. M/S.Bharat Biotech International Limited

ITTA/56/2016HC Telangana10 Jun 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. M/S Narayan Tradecom Pvt Ltd

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

ITAT/76/2025HC Calcutta10 Jun 2025

Bench: :

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 260ASection 68

quashing the reassessment order without considering the fact that the reopening was made on the basis of specific and credible information from the investigation wing of the department ? 2 b) Whether in facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not justified

Leela Tarachand Kothari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer -19(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2453/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarleela Tarachand Kothari, V/S. Income Tax Officer – 1St Floor, Naimal Niketan, बनाम 19(2)(1), Room No. 221, 221, Khetwadi Main Road, Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road, Mumbai - 400 004, Mumbai – 400007, Maharashtra Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaqpk2820K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Ms.Rutuja Pawar & Ms Saiyami Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 68

share trading was sham. The shares in which the assessee had claimed to have made a deal, are identified as Penny Share by the Investigation wing of the Department because rates of these shares were not based on business results of the companies but same were fluctuated by Insider ... assessee was holding the shares. However, from the perusal of the assessment order, it is evident that neither in the findings of the Investigation Wing, referred by the AO from pages 4-6 of the assessment order, nor in the statements of beneficiaries and entry providers recorded during the aforesaid

Amee Shreyance Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the above appeal of the assessee is

ITA 2450/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshatriya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai, (Sr. DR)

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

Subsequently, her case was reopened by the AO u/s 148 of the Act as information received at his end from the Investigation wing revealed that she dealt in share of Banas Finance Ltd. (in short ‘BFS') which was allegedly manipulated on the stock exchange for providing bogus capital gains. Entire ... provided to the assessing officer. The learned assessing officer did not make any enquiry and merely on the basis of the report of investigation wing confirmed the addition under Section 68 of the act. Therefore, according to us the assessee has discharged his onus under Section

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 5 Kolkata vs. M/S B L Tak and Sons HUF

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned Tribunal is set aside and the

ITAT/243/2024HC Calcutta09 Jun 2025

Bench: : The Hon'Ble The Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam -A N D- Hon'Ble Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) Date : 9Th June, 2025.

Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 69C

circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law in failing to give credence to investigations made by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department and the findings of the assessing officer duly recorded in the assessment order on the astronomical rise in price of shares ... follows: “11. We have carefully perused the assessment order dated 25.09.2021. In paragraph 2, the assessing officer sets out the information received from the investigation wing vide letter dated 6.3.2020. It is not in dispute that the assessee’s name also figures in the information furnished by the investigation wing

ACIT, Centralc Circle-1, Ranchi vs. Imperial Automobiles Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 171/RAN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi09 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.R.Mittal, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 156Section 288A

reply, ld CIT DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that information had been received from the Investigation Wing and on the basis of such information that transaction towhich the assessee has done with the share applicants were bogus, the reopening had been done

Global Extrusions Pvt. Ltd., Jamnagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Jamnagar

ITA 203/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.203/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Global Extrusions Private Limited. Vs. Pcit Jamnagar, Ca Govind Sonecha Taranjali Building, “S&A House”, Near Golden City, Jamnagar 361008 80Ft Road, Khodiyar Colony, B/H Saru Section Police Headquarters, Jamnagar 361006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm4319E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Ms. Amoli Gusani, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. (Cit)Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/03 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/06/2025

For Appellant: Ms. Amoli Gusani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. (CIT)DR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 263

case of the appellant was re-opened u/s 147 of the Act on the basis of the information received from the Investigation Wing that M/s Moral Alloy (P) Ltd is an accommodation entry provider and the assessee company is a beneficiary of such accommodation entity through M/s Ankit Metals ... said Show Cause Notice was issued on the basis of the fact that a detailed enquiry was carried out by the Investigation Wing and it was established that M/s. Ankit Metals is an Accommodation Entry provider without any genuine business activities. Therefore, it is certain that there was no exchange

Atul Manoharrao Yamsanwar, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Nagpur

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and all

ITA 256/NAG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 153A

detail and verified along with the seized material and Appraisal Report. After discussion following has been decided unanimously:- 1. The officers of the Investigation Wing are of the considered opinion that recommendations of the ADIT in the Appraisal Report are based on the facts and the circumstances existing ... learned Departmental Representative, the Addl.CIT is involved with the search assessment proceedings right from the time of receipt of appraisal report from the Investigation Wing and the „Satisfaction Note"/documents received from the Assessing Officer of the searched person, still, the Addl.CIT, while granting the approval under section 153D

Atul Manoharrao Yamsanwar, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Nagpur

ITA 254/NAG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 143(3)Section 153A

Atul Manoharrao Yamsanwar, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Nagpur

ITA 251/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 153A

Yrce Educate Pvt. Ltd, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Nagpur

ITA 246/NAG/2022[2019-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2025AY 2019-2022

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member