← 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

ACIT, Circle-2(2), New Delhi vs. M/S. Ansal Phalak Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 217/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Income- Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Ansal Phalak Ward-2(4), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 206, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Naurang House, 21, Kasturba Gandi Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aafcp6583P (Appellant) (Respondent) With Ita Nos.216 & 217/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Vs. M/S. Acit, Ansal Phalak Circle-2(2), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 115, Ansal Bhawan, Naurang House, 16, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, C.P., New Delhi Pan: Aafcp6583P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv. Department By Ms. Jaya Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Sh. B.S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024

Section 143(3)Section 68

Company unless any adverse evidence is on record. Source of Source cannot be enquired from Assessee. Additional evidence other than information received from Investigation Wing must be brought on record by Assessing Officer" ITAT Delhi, ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. ITA No. 4122/Del/2009 dated 22.10.2014 (b) It was held "Arguments ... find any evidence and 7 | P a g e ITA No.5658/Del/2015; 216/Del/2020 & 217/Del/2020 had not given any basis. No detail of investigation done by Investigation Wing was brought on record" (c) ITAT Delhi, ITO v. Rakam Money Matters P. Ltd. ITA No.2821/Del/2011 dated 16.10.2014 It was held All the documents

ACIT, Circle-2(2), New Delhi vs. Ansal Phalak Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 216/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Income- Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Ansal Phalak Ward-2(4), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 206, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Naurang House, 21, Kasturba Gandi Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aafcp6583P (Appellant) (Respondent) With Ita Nos.216 & 217/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Vs. M/S. Acit, Ansal Phalak Circle-2(2), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 115, Ansal Bhawan, Naurang House, 16, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, C.P., New Delhi Pan: Aafcp6583P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv. Department By Ms. Jaya Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Sh. B.S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024

Section 143(3)Section 68

Company unless any adverse evidence is on record. Source of Source cannot be enquired from Assessee. Additional evidence other than information received from Investigation Wing must be brought on record by Assessing Officer" ITAT Delhi, ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. ITA No. 4122/Del/2009 dated 22.10.2014 (b) It was held "Arguments ... find any evidence and 7 | P a g e ITA No.5658/Del/2015; 216/Del/2020 & 217/Del/2020 had not given any basis. No detail of investigation done by Investigation Wing was brought on record" (c) ITAT Delhi, ITO v. Rakam Money Matters P. Ltd. ITA No.2821/Del/2011 dated 16.10.2014 It was held All the documents

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ansal Phalak Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5658/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Income- Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Ansal Phalak Ward-2(4), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 206, B Wing, 2Nd Floor, Naurang House, 21, Kasturba Gandi Marg, New Delhi Pan :Aafcp6583P (Appellant) (Respondent) With Ita Nos.216 & 217/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Vs. M/S. Acit, Ansal Phalak Circle-2(2), Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 115, Ansal Bhawan, Naurang House, 16, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, C.P., New Delhi Pan: Aafcp6583P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Ravi Sharma, Adv. Department By Ms. Jaya Choudhary, Cit(Dr) Sh. B.S. Anand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.12.2024

Section 143(3)Section 68

Company unless any adverse evidence is on record. Source of Source cannot be enquired from Assessee. Additional evidence other than information received from Investigation Wing must be brought on record by Assessing Officer" ITAT Delhi, ITO v. N.C. Cables Ltd. ITA No. 4122/Del/2009 dated 22.10.2014 (b) It was held "Arguments ... find any evidence and 7 | P a g e ITA No.5658/Del/2015; 216/Del/2020 & 217/Del/2020 had not given any basis. No detail of investigation done by Investigation Wing was brought on record" (c) ITAT Delhi, ITO v. Rakam Money Matters P. Ltd. ITA No.2821/Del/2011 dated 16.10.2014 It was held All the documents