“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

Oracle India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Range- 19, New Delhi

ITA 1353/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Apr 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Sh. Sudesh Garg, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal Singh, CIT-DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 153D

such type of cases, regular discussion between the range head and AO happened regularly whenever needed. Appraisal report or other communication with the investigation wing of the department and seized/impounded materials explored and discussed from time to time and thereafter assessment order finalised after approval from the range head

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gwalior vs. Dairyman Producer Company Limited, Gwalior

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 557/AGR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, CA – Ld. AR

Section 147

ground that the assessee made purchases of Rs.15.35 Crores from M/s Nandan Dairy Products which was termed as sham entity by the investigation wing. It was alleged that this entity indulged in carrying out bogus sales. The assessee, in support of purchases, furnished ledger extracts, purchase bills and its bank

Deergold Commercial Pvt. Ltd., North Twenty Four Parganas vs. ITO, Ward - 14(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2465/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 2465/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148

Rs.48,430/-. The main source of income of the assessee is from business. Later on, it was revealed after receipt of information from the Investigation Wing that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries, who received sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from a shell/paper company named M/s. Krish Deltatrade

Popatlal Peerchand Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(2)(5) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal against the validity of reassessment raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 914/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 254(1)

Notice under section 148 dated 25.02.2015 was served upon the assessee. Case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information from the investigation wing that assessee is beneficiary of alleged bogus purchases as per the information of sale tax department. As per allegation, the assessee has shown purchases from

Atlantis It Solution, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 303/MUM/2025[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shi Prabhash Shankaratlantis It Solution Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income- 8, Engineer Building, Awabai Tax 6(2), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Kasahinath Tardeo, Mumbai- Road, Mumbai-400 020 400 034 Pan : Aalca6845 Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, SR DR

Section 115BSection 12ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 35(1)(ii)Section 35ASection 80G(5)

ground that M/s BIOVED Research Society and claimed a weighted deduction of Rs.52,50,000/- being 175% of Rs.30 lakhs. It was found that Investigation Wing, Kolkata conducted a survey under section 133A of the Act in case of several entities, wherein it was found that bogus donations were paid ... certain trusts and societies. Therefore, while referring to the report of Investigation Wing wherein it was noted that many corporate / non corporate entities had paid bogus donations to certain trusts / societies and one of these trusts / societies was M/s BIOVED Research Society and, therefore, Commissioner of Income-tax(Exemption) cancelled

Hasmukh Khetshi Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Circle 23(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 5932/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Ld. D.R

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

information, but he has not produced client code modification related information and have not brought anything on record that shall contradict finding of Investigation Wing and NSE information. viii. To verify broker u/s 131 of Income Tax Act 1961, the summon was issued. But the Director of broking firm chose ... broker calling for information, he has not produced client code modification related information to contradict the finding of the investigation wing and NSE information, director of the broking firm choose not to appear, in spite of sending notice u/s 131 of the Act and the fact that

Minish Rameshbhai Vyas, Mumbai vs. Asst. CIT 32 (2), Mumbai

ITA 4262/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Mona SolankiFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meshram

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

quoted price of shares of VIL listed on stock exchanges. 11. It is the case of the Assessee that the report of the Investigation Wing did not name VIL as penny stock company. We find that in Paragraph 9.1 of the Assessment Order, the Assessing Officer has recorded that ... material record to support the abovesaid findings recorded by the Assessing Officer except for the general observations/facts recorded in the report of the Investigation Wing referred to by the Assessing Officer in Paragraph 5 to 9 of the Assessment Order. On the other hand the material placed on record

Suman Kishore, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1434/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Sunita Bhardwaj, Vs Acit, 1/2, Taj Apartments, Circle-63(1), R.K.Puram, Sector-12, Delhi Delhi-110022. Pan-Ahfpb1928E Appellant Respondent

Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

profession of advocate, filed her return of income, declaring income of INR 46,39,180/-. Based on the information received from ITO, Investigation Wing, Unit-4, New Delhi ,the AO initiated re-assessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 20.03.2019. Thereafter, various notices were issued

Brijwasi Real Estate, Mathura vs. Income Tax Officer 1(3)(1), Mathura

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 74/AGR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.74/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Brijwasi Real Estate Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ 40/2-A, Sarswati Bhawan, Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura. Vs. Prayag Ghat, Mathura (Up). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aakfb6619C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. M.M. Agarwal, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 24-01-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 30-12-2018. Having Heard Rival Submissions & Upon Perusal Of Case Records, Our Adjudication Would Be As Under. 2. From The Case Records, It Emerges That The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened By Issue Of Notice U/S 148 On 31-03-2018 Pursuant To Receipt Of Certain Information From Investigation Wing. It Was Alleged That Income Of Rs.544.47 Lacs Escaped Assessment. The Same Represent Investment In Two Immoveable Properties By The Firm. The Assessee Stated That The Properties Were Purchased Out Of Partners’ Capital. The Ld.

For Appellant: Sh. M.M. Agarwal, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s 148 on 31-03-2018 pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing. It was alleged that income of Rs.544.47 Lacs escaped assessment. The same represent investment in two immoveable properties by the firm. The assessee stated that ... citing various judicial pronouncements. 4. The Ld. CIT(A), in para 7.3, rejected legal ground by observing that information was received from investigation wing that the assessee had purchased immoveable properties and the source of purchases required investigation. The same was sufficient enough to form belief of escapement of income

R D Tea Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1555/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1555/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 R D Tea Limited……………………..……………………………..………….……Appellant Dhandhania House, 2Nd Floor, 4, Middleton Street, Kolkata – 700071. [Pan: Aabcr3010M] Vs. Acit, Circle-4(1), Kolkata…..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 28, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 22, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.06.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Company Filed Its Original Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 By Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.67,34,990/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Assessed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 19.03.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.86,23,780/- Which Was Subsequently Rectified U/S 154 Of The Act On 27.04.2015 By Assessing Total Income Of Rs.83,90,960/-. Thereafter, The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 Of The Act On 27.03.2019 After Obtaining Approval From The Competent Authority. In Response To Such Notice, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Again Declaring The Same Income As Earlier I.E. Rs.67,34,990/-. During The

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 250Section 68

from M/s Oven Commercial Pvt. Ltd. which was considered as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act as per reports received from the Investigation Wings. In this connection, a show-cause notice was issued dated 17.12.2019. However, the assessee has failed to comply to the notice issued by the Assessing Officer ... assessee’s failure to disclose material fact, the reopening is invalid. Further, he stated that the Assessing Officer merely relied upon the information from Investigation Wing without application of independent mind or enquiry which is impermissible under settled principle of law. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR stated

Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Kolkata vs. Sur Mangal Holdings Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1437/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68Section 69

connivance with the promotors, brokers and entry 4.14 As stated earlier, the entire addition has been made merely by placing reliance on the Investigation Wing report. Now the issue that arises is as to whether the AO merely on the basis of investigation wing report could come to a conclusion ... corroborative evidence establishing the allegation that the transaction is bogus is discernible in the assessment order except the reliance upon the Report of the Investigation wing. In a catena of judicial decisions it is held that' without corroborating evidence, addition ought not to be made by the AO, merely

Mr. Viren Rohitkumar Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 32(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalmr. Viren Rohitkumar Shah, 02/009 Om Heera Pana Mall, Oshiwara, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400102 ............... Appellant Pan : Aaqps2809B V/S

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh JainFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

return of income on 03/05/2017, declaring a total income of Rs.20,60,760. Subsequently, on the basis of the information received from the Investigation Wing regarding a search action conducted in the case of Group which was accepting cash against the sale of diamond/gold jewellery and the assessee being

DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai vs. R C Gems, Bandra

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as Cross Objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 813/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

ground that during the search in the case of Ratnakala Exports Private Limited, the software which was found and seized by the Investigation Wing it was found that assessee had sold patala diamond in cash to Ratnakala Exports Private Limited and R.C.Gems during the course of search and also

DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai vs. R C Gems, Bandra

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as Cross Objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 812/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai vs. R C Gems, Bandra(East

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as Cross Objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 721/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

Income Tax Officer Ward 25 (3)(1), Mumbai, Kautliya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex vs. Nikunj Ambalal Patel (HUF), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4303/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 4303/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Rampriya Raghavan

Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

processed u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act on 30.10.2017. Subsequently, the case was reopened in view of the information received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, as per which during a search action conducted on Kushal Group, it was found that the group had indulged in providing bogus long/short-term capital

ITO-19(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Raichand Parasmal Chokshi, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1486/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer 19(3)(1) Raichand Parasmal Chokshi 405, Piramal Chambers, 305, Ashirwad Building, Lalabaug 10Th Khetwadi Lane, Vs. Mumbai 400012 Mumbai 400004. (Pan: Aaapc6486C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer 19(3)(1) Raichand Parasmal Chokshi 405, Piramal Chambers, Huf Lalabaug 305, Ashirwad Building, Mumbai 400012 Vs. 10Th Khetwadi Lane, Mumbai 400004. (Pan: Aaahr1005A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Umang Shah, Ca Revenue : Shri R.R. Makwana, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 23.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are In The Case Of An Individual & Huf Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- Ay 2017-18 24/1060184522(1) Dated 29.01.2024 For Individual & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064573907(1), Dated 02.05.2024 For The Huf, Passed Against The Assessment Orders By Income Tax Officer 19(3)(1), Mumbai U/S. 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 29.05.2023 & 21.04.2023, Respectively For Individual & Huf For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Appeal In Ita No. 1486/Mum/2024 Is By The Individual & That In Ita No. 3374/Mum/2024 Is By The Huf With The Present Individual As Its Karta. Common Issue Is Involved In Both The Appeals By The Revenue, Raising Identical Grounds Except For Variation In The Quantum Of Addition Made By The Ld. Assessing Officer. Accordingly, Grounds Taken By The Revenue In The Case Of Individual In Ita No. 1486/Mum/2024 Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Umang Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Addl. CIT

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 144Section 68

disallowance of Long Term Capital Gains of Rs. 53,84,100/-without considering the fact that Assessing Office relying on the report of Investigation Wing which is premier investigation authority of Income - Tax Department and the onus is on the assessee to establish the genuineness of the price hike ... conclusion by observing that there is unusual rise in the price of the shares sold by the assessee which has been investigated by the Investigation Wing of the Department to establish that cash has been routed from various accounts to provide accommodation to the assessee and that assessee had failed

Ravi Nandan Kr. Sinha vs. DCIT

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee including quantum and penalty are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/PAT/2014[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2025AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 144Section 148Section 148(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

Ravi Nandan Kumar Sinha based on information gathered by the Investigation Wing for alleged receipts of payment without actual supplying of goods. After considering the facts, we find merit in the submissions of the legal heir of the assessee as no opportunity was given at all to present supporting evidences

Rav Inandan Kr.Sinha vs. DCIT

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee including quantum and penalty are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 168/PAT/2014[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2025AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 144Section 148Section 148(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

Ravi Nandan Kr. Sinha, Patna vs. DCIT, C.Circle-5, Patna

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee including quantum and penalty are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 256/PAT/2006[91-92]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 144Section 148Section 148(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)