“investigation wing”

Kalpana Ramesh Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

very nature of the information available with him. 5.2 Though the reopening was triggered on the basis of information allegedly received from the Investigation Wing and Kalpana Ramesh Jain Vs. Deputy 8 Commissioner of Income Tax ITA No. 4595 to 4597/MUM/2025 available on the income-tax portal, the Assessing Officer

Kalpana Ramesh Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

very nature of the information available with him. 5.2 Though the reopening was triggered on the basis of information allegedly received from the Investigation Wing and available on the income-tax portal, the Assessing Officer failed to apply his independent mind to the specific facts of the assessee's case

Kalpana Ramesh Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

very nature of the information available with him. 5.2 Though the reopening was triggered on the basis of information allegedly received from the Investigation Wing and Kalpana Ramesh Jain Vs. Deputy 8 Commissioner of Income Tax ITA No. 4595 to 4597/MUM/2025 available on the income-tax portal, the Assessing Officer

N N Sippy Productions Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 13(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarn.N. Sippy Productions V/S. Income Tax Officer – 13(1)(1) Private Limited बनाम 225, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. A4, Shalimar Chs, Road, Mumbai – 400 054, Santacruz, Mumbai – Maharashtra 400054, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aagcn6412N Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

were not satisfied. 1.2. The Ld CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and/or on facts in solely relying upon the information received from investigation wing so that action of AO is merely upon borrowed satisfaction and not on his independent satisfaction. 1.3. The Ld CIT(A) has grievously erred ... and/or on facts by upholding action of AO in not corroborating & not establishing nexus on the allegation of investigation wing qua the transaction of appellant, by putting sole reliance upon the information received from investigation wing. 1.4. The Ld CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and/or on facts

Mr. Anmol Govindram Sekhri, Bandra Arcade, Nandi Gully, Opp Bandra Railway St vs. Circle 16(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankarmrs. Suneeta Sekhri V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of (Legal Heir Of Mr. Anmol बनाम Income Tax, Circle – 16(2), Govindram Sekhri), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – Ground Floor, Bandra Arcade, 400020, Maharashtra Nandi Gully, Opp. Bandra Railway Station, Bandra(West), Mumbai – 400 050, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Alhps9957L Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

shares for over 20 years. Notice u/s 148A(b) was issued and the main contention was that as per the report of the Investigation wing, FIL was found to have an unusual trading pattern. It was alleged that it was dealing in penny stocks/scrip shares. The assessee in the year

Mystical Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is Allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalι.Τ.Α. No.5222/Mum/2024 A.Y: 2011-12 Mystical Pvt Ltd Constructions A 603, A1 Akbar Bldg, Pe Road, Momin Nagar, Jogeswari (W), Mumbai - 400102 Pan - Aaccn5191N (Appellant) Vs Dcit, Circle 5(2)(1) Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai. (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Simran Dhawan A/W Mr. Ravi Gantara Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02.02.2026 Order Per: Shri. Sandeep Gosain, J.M.: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order Dt. 06.08.2025 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ('The Act'), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) / Cit(A) For The

corresponding specific concerns of the Bhoomi Group on the other side of the transaction. 7.3 No attempts were made after the search by the Investigation wing or the AO of Ekta and Bhoomi Group or by the AO of appellant company to examine or refer to the entries already made ... concerns ofBhoomi Group. Therefore, it appears from the records that the AO of Ekta and Bhoomi Group merely acted on the borrowed satisfaction from Investigation wing, without making any enquiries in the case of Bhoomi Group in the first place and thus AO of the assessee company proceeded