“investigation wing”

Pooja Equiresearch Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5941/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Pooja Equiresearch Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-8(2), B-101, Hari Darshan Bhogilal Mumbai Phadia Road, Kandivali (West) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaacp 6499 F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्ाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Hariya & Ms. Shruti Kalyanikar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Sr.Dr

assessee, however, the Assessee made no compliance and therefore the AO while considering the data available in the CD provided by the Investigation Wing, observed that the Assessee has received loan from three parties, which have no creditworthiness and are without any economic rationale, details of the same ... back drop of above mentioned things; the following facts are emerged from the verification of submission made by assessee and findings of Investigation wing. (i) Notices u/s 133(6) of the Act were issued to the M/s Spring Enclave Pvt Ltd. M/s Harsharatna Finance And Investment

Atul B. Chauhan (HUF), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-30(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2015-16 Atul B. Chauhan (Huf), Income Tax Officer-30(1)(1), C-403, Satguru Darshan, 5Th Floor,Kautilya Bhawan, Liberty Gardencross Road, Vs. C-41 To C-43, G Block, Malad West, Bkc, Bandra (East), Mumbai Mumbai Pan : Aahha5914L (Appellant) (Respondent)

also confirmed the same. 3. The Learned AR submitted that the AO has placed his reliance entirely on the report given by the investigation wing and he did not disprove any of the evidences furnished by the assessee to prove the factum of purchase and sale of shares. He submitted ... heard rival contentions and perused the record. We notice that the assessing officer has primarily placed reliance on the report given by the Investigation wing of the Income tax department, Kolkata in order to arrive at the conclusion that the long term capital gains reported by the assessee is bogus

Mukesh Shah, HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward -17(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Shriamarjit Singh & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

conducted by the Director of Investigation, Kolkata and the cash trail was duly verified and during the course of search and survey actions, the investigation Wing of Kolkata has also covered the regional office of M/s Religare Securities Ltd where the assessee is registered and that this share broker ... entire transaction of sale was through BSE and the payment was received through banking channel. We notice that the investigation report prepared by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata is a disclosed report with modus adopted for manipulation of prices of certain shares and generation of bogus capital gains. We note that

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

case are as under: 2. The Assessee is an individual and had not furnished regular return of income. Subsequently, based on information received from investigation wing, notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to assessee on 31/03/2018. From the assessment order it is noted that, notices were served through post ... filing a letter dated 29/11/2018. 2.1 The Ld.AO noted that, assessee was having two PANs in his names and certain information received from the investigation wing reflected transaction in the PAN that assessee submitted to be not used being DQGPS6936E. It was also noted that such transaction was not included