“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

M R Patel and Sons, South Tower, Ambli Bopal Road vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan (Vejalpur), Nr Sachin Tower, Anandnagar Prahladnagar Road, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 523/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

year under consideration was. thereafter, reopened u/s. 147 of the Act on the basis of information received by the AO from the Investigation Wing that assessee is one of the beneficiary of accommodation entries in form of fictitious loan of Rs 1,13,27,000 received from Dishman. The reasons ... that the assessee is a beneficiary of fictitious loan from Dishman to the tune of Rs.1,13,27,000/- as per report of the Investigation Wing, thus the same is being liable to addition u/s. 68/69A of the Act and such issue has not been properly adequately examined

Rajagopal Upadhyaya, Bellary vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bellary

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1984/BANG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Dan D’Silva, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 69A

which is further evident by the statement where he admitted. . Page 5 of 10 12.3 The AO also was of the view that the investigation wing has not violated the instruction provided under the CBDT Instructions dated 10- 03-2003 as the statement was recorded based on credible evidence found

Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Delhi vs. Artistic Finance Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, Ground no. 3 as raised by the assessee deserves to be allowed and the impugned addition cannot be sustained

ITA 2650/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang(), Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Mahesh Kumar, Vs Ito, 6/305/1A, Doonger Ward-68(6), Mohalla, Delhi-110032. Delhi. Pan-Aoopk6335A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Neeraj Mangla, Ca Respondent By Shri Krishna K. Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2025

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Assessing Officer vide notice dated 28.03.2019 under Section 148 of the Act. The assessment was reopened presumably on account of information received from the Investigation Wing about the assessee having received accommodation entries amounting to Rs.9,60,000/- in financial year relevant to assessment year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer

Yashraj Estates Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 9902/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153CSection 68

made by the enquires were made in the case of M/s Splendid Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., observations made by the 7 Yashraj Estates P. Ltd. Investigation Wing, inferences drawn by the Investigation Wing, and thereafter there is one chart tabulating the aggregates credits amounting ... from four entities. Thus para 2 of reasons recorded in sum and substance is reproduction of information from investigation wing. Now in para 3, Ld. AO records that he has perused the information contained in the report and the evidences gathered, the report has provided the details of the Modus

M/S. Frugal Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 640/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.638 To 641/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2007-08 To 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshwer Prashad Painuly, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Amisha S. Gupta, CIT-DR

Section 132(4)Section 292CSection 69

unaccounted cash of Rs. 75,00,000/- for the purpose of purchasing the property. This statement was not only reconfirmed on 21.03.2012 before the Investigation Wing, but was also never retracted. As a result, the case of the appellant not only has original seized evidence in the shape

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Surat

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 106/SRT/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 69C

ACIT, 155 taxmann.com 1, has held that where AO treated entire purchase as bogus based on findings of ITA No.106/SRT/2025/AY.2009-10 Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya Investigation Wing and levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c), since payment of purchase had been made through account payee cheques and there was corresponding sales

Akshay Kumar Rungta, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), International Taxation

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per above terms

ITA 66/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyit(It)A No.66/Bang/2024 Assessment Year :2015-16

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 151Section 153Section 153CSection 250

circumstances of the case. c. Grounds on Legal Issues: i. 153C: The reopening is based on information gathered during search conducted by the Investigation Wing and the learned assessing officer is not justified in passing the order under section 147 r.w.s144C of the Act and ought to have passed ... further question on the aforesaid point and passed order accepting the return income. The AO received information from DDIT (Investigation Wing) that the assessee has earned capital gain on sale of its IT(IT)A No.66/Bang/2024 Page 6 of 31 shares which is exempt under section

Quality Heightcon Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -14(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1489/MUM/2025[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2025AY 2010-2011

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

For Appellant: Shri Gyaneshwar Kataram, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 154

notice u/s 148 of the Act. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings, on the basis of the information received from the investigation wing relating to the assessee, who has indulged in the practice of taking bogus purchase bills and routing it through books of account, the AO issued

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 9 Kolkata vs. P L Goenka HUF

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the substantial

ITAT/241/2024HC Calcutta06 May 2025

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

For Appellant: Mr. Tilak Mitra, AdvocateFor Respondent: None

Section 144BSection 147Section 260A

concepts. Hence, conclusion arrived at by 3 the Assessing Officer based upon his own satisfaction drawn from the information received from the investigation wing cannot be said to be borrowed satisfaction? (e) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Income ... 144B of the Act. Before the learned Tribunal the assessee contended that the assessing officer has only acted on the information received from the investigation wing and has not recorded his satisfaction nor did any exercise to examine the transactions done by the assessee before recording the reasons for reopening

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat, Anavil Business Centre vs. Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Diwali Baug Athwalines

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 115/SRT/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.107 To 109/Srt/2025 Assessment Years:(2010-11 To 2012-13) (Hybrid Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Ward – 1(2)(6), 17, Hetal Nagar Society, Rander Road, Surat Near Navyug College, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Akvps5306G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Himashu Gandhi, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.115/Srt/2025 Assessment Year:(2007-08) The Ito, Vs. Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Ward – 1(3)(1), 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Surat Athwalines, Surat - 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.1/Srt/2025 [Arising In Ita No.115/Srt/2025] Assessment Year:(2007-08) Navinbhai Himatlal Shah, Vs. The Ito, 7/Swashray Society, Diwali Baug, Ward – 1(3)(1), Athwalines, Surat - 395001 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afsps3575H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mitul R. Mehta, Ca Respondent By Ms Neerja Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

Section 271(1)(c)

case of Mun Gems vs. ACIT, 155 taxmann.com 1, has held that where AO treated entire purchase as bogus based on findings of Investigation Wing and levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c), since payment of purchase had been made through account payee cheques and there was corresponding sales

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Surat

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 109/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Section 271(1)(c)

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Surat

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 108/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2011-12

Section 271(1)(c)

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(6), Surat vs. Hiteshbhai Popatbhai Sakariya, Surat

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 107/SRT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2010-11

Section 271(1)(c)

Sanjaybhai Damjibhai Golakiya, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 951/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.951/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Sanjaybhai Damjibhai Golakiya, Vs. The Assessment Unit, D-74, Vithalnagar Society, Hirabaug, Income-Tax Department, Varachha Road, Surat - 395006 Jurisdictional Ao: The Ito, Ward – 3(3)(1), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Alopg2048R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06/05/2025

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 253(3)Section 271(1)(c)

case of Mun Gems vs. ACIT, 155 taxmann.com 1, has also held that where AO treated entire purchase as bogus based on findings of Investigation Wing and levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c), since payment of purchase had been made through account payee cheques and there was corresponding sales

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Karnani Solvex Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 850/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(4)

amounts. It is further noteworthy that as on 31.03.2012 the entity has no tangible or intangible assets. During the course of enquiry conducted by investigation wing, Kolkata, in order to examine the nature and creditworthiness of transactions, summons were issued to the Principal Officer of the above mentioned concerns. However ... proceed to initiate the re-assessment proceedings. There is no other material available on record except the information received from the Investigation Wing. The AO on the basis of the information and material received from Investigation Wing has recorded reasons for reopening of the assessment which has ultimately found

Gck Stock Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 1(4), Jaipur

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

ITA 1572/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2015-2016

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 148ASection 234Section 250Section 271

reopened the same instead of FAO d) Without making any inquiry e) Without granting hearing f) Only on the basis of information from Investigation Wing g) Without furnishing copy of approval granted by Pr. CCIT h) Template based order i) Even though it is change of opinion j) Even though ... under Section 148A 1.1 The reopening of assessment was conducted in accordance with the provisions of Section 148A after receiving credible information from the Investigation Wing and SEBI regarding the involvement of the assessee in reversal trade in BSE stock options. 1.2 The assessee's contention that the reopening

M/S. Samaksh Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 113/KOL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm M/S. Samaksh Holdings Pvt. Acit, Circle-1(1) Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan, 7Th Floor, P-7, 16, Strand Road, Diamond Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Heritage, 14Th Floor, West Bengal Vs. Room No- 1402, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700001 700069 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck2106P Assessee By : Shri Abhishak Bansal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sailen Samadder, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Abhishak Bansal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

repeatedly by the assessee. M/s. Samaksh Holdings Pvt. Ltd.; 2011-12 03. The facts in brief are that the ld. AO received information from investigation Wing, Kolkata to the effect that the assessee is beneficiary of Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares from various companies which according ... account of bogus KTCG brought back by the appellant. The appellant had received these entries from various parties. The AO has received information from Investigation Wing at Kolkata that these parties are involved in giving accommodation entries in the garb of bogus Long Term Capital Gain The appellant has challenged

Md. Enamul Haque, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2261/KOL/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 132Section 153A

case of the assessee are that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted against the assessee by the Investigation Wing, Murshidabad and Kolkata, consequent upon the search operation, the case of the Haque and JHM Group of cases’ where authorization for search were executed were

Md. Enamul Haque, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle - 4(4), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2260/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 132Section 153A

Narendra Khimji Savla, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6567/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui- Sr. DR

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 69ASection 69C

merits the ld. AR submitted that the AO has made the addition towards alleged bogus loan merely based on the report of the Investigation Wing without conducting any independent enquiry. The ld. AR further submitted that the impugned loan has been repaid by the assessee and that