← All Phrases

“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
97
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
90
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
81
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
78
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

Shri Simerdeep Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 260/ASR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 260/Asr/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessmentyear: 2016-17) Shri Simerdeep Singh Dcit बनाम/ Vs. H. No. 833 Urban Estate Phase-I Central Circle-1 Jalandhar- 144001. Jalandhar. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abrps-8245-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : S/Shri J. S. Bhasin (Advocate)& A. P. Singh (Ca) –Ld.Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondentby : Ms. Vandana Vijay Mohite (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: S/Shri J. S. Bhasin (Advocate)& A. P. SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Vandana Vijay Mohite (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153A

payment of Rs.20 Lacs was stated to be already received by way of RTGS dated 02-03-2015. However, upon being confronted by the investigation wing, Shri Kuljeet Singh denied the existence of this agreement but admitted that the stated property was purchased by him for Rs.90 Lacs under ... Rs.20 Lacs was stated to be already received by way of RTGS dated 02-03-2015. However, the said document was confronted by investigation wing to Shri Kuljeet Singh who denied the existence of this agreement but admitted that the stated property was purchased by him for Rs.90 Lacs under

Ashok Kumar Jain, Meerut vs. PCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by appellant/assessee are allowed

ITA 2627/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhita No. 2627/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ita No.2628/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ashok Kumar Jain, Vs. Principal Cit, Prop. Mange Lal Prakash Ghaziabad Chand, 45-B Gupta Colony, (Uttar Pradesh) T.P. Nagar, Meerut Pin: 250002 Pan: Aeipj3089E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Piyush Agarwal, Ca Department By: Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.06.2025 O R D E R Per Vimal Kumar: The Appeals Filed By The Appellant/Assessee Are Against Separate Orders Dated 27.03.2024 Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Ghaziabad (Hereinafter Referred As ‘Ld. Pcit’ ) Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As “The Act”) Arising Out Of Separate Assessment Orders, Both Dated 29.03.2022 Of National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As “Ld. Ao”) Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act For Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Javed Akhtar, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 263Section 40Section 40A(3)

checked as per assessment order and addition was made earlier also. 2. Purchase sales and trading results are accepted by VAT Department 3. Investigation wing report is on suspicious basis that payment was made for more than 20,000. 4. Even in case of violation of 40A(3) only profit ... Mechanical Manner 4. Non Supply of CTR No Report 5. Reassessment based on Yes Wrong facts 6. Non Supply of No Investigation Wing Report  That the AO without passing a speaking order disposed only 4 objection out of 6 objection which were raised by the assessee. (AO's Reply

My Healthskape Medicals Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Officer, Mumbai - 4, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2120/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaआयकर अपील सुं./Ita No. 2120/Mum/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) M/S. My Healthskape V/S. Pcit, Mumbai-4 Medicals Pvt. Ltd. बिाम Room No. 629, 6Th Floor, 4-425A, Sharma Industrial Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Estate, Walbhat Road, Karve Road, Mumbai- Goregaon (E), Mumbai- 400020 400063 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aadcm4683K Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Rakesh Joshi राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri Ritesh Misra

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra
Section 12ASection 135Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)Section 37Section 80G

Bioved Research Society. The registration of Bioved Research Society was cancelled by the IT Department u/s.12AA on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing. Bogus donations are being taken vide cheque/RTGS and thereafter taking commission, the same is routed back to the donor in form to cash after bogus ... syndicate. The registration of Bioved Research Society was also cancelled by the Income Tax Department u/s. 12AA on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing. In view of the above, the bogus donation of Rs.20,00,000/- given to Bioved ResearchSociety is required to be disallowed and added back

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Sportking India Limited, Village Kanech Gt Road

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 16/CHANDI/2024[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 16/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit-Central Circle-2 M/S Sportking India Limited बनाम/ Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor Village Kanech, Gt Road, Sahnewal Vs. Kichlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001 Khurd, Punjab 141120 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3037-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./ Co No.30/Chandi/2024 (In Ita No.16/Chandi/2024) (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Sportking India Limited Dcit-Central Circle-2 बनाम/ Village Kanech, Gt Road, Sco 1-6, 3Rd Floor Vs. Sahnewal Khurd, Punjab 141120 Kichlu Nagar, Ludhiana-141001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-3037-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar (Ca) & Ms. Deepali Aggarwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Revenue Is In Further Appeal Before Us For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar (CA) & Ms. DeepaliFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 68

found in that respect during search on the assessee. Further, the reassessment has been initiated merely on the basis of information received from investigation wing. The payments to the suppliers were through banking channels. The assessee also raised various other arguments to assail the quantum addition on legal ground ... basis of search proceedings. This assessment has been reopened by Ld. AO pursuant to receipt of information from the investigation wing that the assessee allegedly made bogus purchases from three entities as admitted by those entities during the course of certain proceedings in their respective cases. Armed with this information