“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

Vishwas Marketing Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 26(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 3572/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanshri S.Rifaur Rahman

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

Kolkata d on the detailed investigation carried out by the Kolkata d on the detailed investigation carried out by the Kolkata Investigation Wing, considering considering the unusual loss claimed by the assessee by the assessee. He made the detailed analysis of SRK scrips and relied on the various made ... scrips and relied on the various statement made the detailed analysis of SRK scrips and relied on the various recorded by Kolkata Investigation Investigation Wing from Shri Bidyoot Sarkar, Shri Sanjay m Shri Bidyoot Sarkar, Shri Sanjay Vora, Shri Jai Kishan and Shri Anil Kedia. He came to the conclusion

Jyoti Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 29, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5419/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Ruchesh Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT DR

Section 131Section 143Section 68

acceptable to him. The AO proceeded to treat the transactions as penny stock and relying on the investigation report on penny stock from the Investigation Wing, he disallowed the same u/s 68 of the Act to the extent of Rs.1,28,58,450/-. 5. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee ... recorded. The Ld. AO however, merely reproducing the price movement of the said scrips and placing reliance and quoting the report of the Kolkatta Investigation wing (which was not confronted to the assessee even during sending the show cause notice) and placing reliance on the statement of brokers (which were

Rachna Sanjay Shah, Ahmedabad vs. PCIT, Ahmedabad -1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 626/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri/St.R. Senthil Kumar & Narendra Prasad Sinhaasst.Year :2014-2015 Rachana Sanjay Shah The Pr.Cit-1 72, Tapovan Society Vs Ahmedabad. Nr. Manekbaug Hall Ambawadi Ahmedabad 380015. Pan : Amdps 6571 P

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divatia, AR and Shri Samir Vora, AFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

under section 10(38), in a preplanned manner to evade taxes. The AO extensively relied upon the search and survey operations conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business

Nita Padamchand Agarwal, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-24(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3122/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K(SMC)" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. M. GolvalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Pardeshi

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

holding that the assessee had traded in shares of M/s. Scan Steels Limited which was a ‘penny stock’ as per information received from the Investigation Wing. 7. The Lower Authorities erred in invoking the provisions of Section 68 of the Act. 8. Without prejudice to Ground numbers ... contended that there was no live nexus or link between the formation of belief and the information said to have been received from the Investigation Wing. However, the CIT(A) was not convinced and therefore, the CIT(A) upheld validity of reassessment proceedings. Further, the CIT(A) agreed with

Sahil Singla, Chandigarh vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1018/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 271ASection 68Section 69Section 69A

therefore requested to kindly go through the replies as wet as detailed notes submitted by these companies vis-a-vis Observation of the 20 Investigation Wing in its appraisal report regarding these companies as mentioned here in above. It is further, requested that if you have any contrary facts ... this deviation note, the Assessing Officer has categorically admitted that there was no document or reasoning supplied to him by the Investigation Wing on the basis of which, the credit entries in the bank account of the said company could be treated as unexplained. Further, he also stated that after

Gehna Jewellers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1004/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: the Tribunal. Vide order dated 22/11/2017 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 3530/MUM/2017 the order passed under Section 263 of the Act was set aside and

For Appellant: Shri V.C. ShahFor Respondent: Mrs. Beena Santosh/Mr. Pushkraj

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 263

INR.11,33,022/- from the said party. In our view, in the facts of the present case, the aforesaid information received from the investigation wing formed sufficient tangible material for initiation of re-assessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act. As per the reasons recorded, the Assessing Officer

Smt. Sudha Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no orders to cost

ITA 532/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

issue notice u/s 148 and complete lack of application of mind. AO has simply relied upon the report and conclusion drawn upon by Investigation Wing without carrying out any preliminary enquiry and investigation and establishing the necessary nexus between material and formation of belief that income has escaped assessment. There ... aside. Smt. Anshita Vimal Jain Vs. ITO (2023) 199 ITD 168 (Surat) (Trib.) Where AO merely on basis of information received from Investigation wing, Mumbai with reference to search carried out in case of one ‘GJ’ reopened assessment on ground that assessee had taken accommodation entries of bogus purchase bills

ITO-41(4)(1), Mumbai, Bandra (East) vs. Chirania Trading LLP, Goregaon (East)

ITA 993/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt/Shri Raj Singh

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

exemption made by the Assessee under Section 10(38) of the Act in the return of income relying upon the findings of the Investigation wing and the theory of probability [as propounded in the case of Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801) (SC) and the C.O. No. 39/Mum/2024 Assessment Year

ITO-41(4)(1), Mumbai, Bandra (East) vs. Chirania Trading LLP, Goregaon (East)

ITA 992/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt/Shri Raj Singh

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

Ahmed P. Surani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 3(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 361/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

u/sec 143(2) and u/sec142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued. The Assessing Officer (Α.Ο) has received information from Kolkata Investigation Wing on the trading of shares of M/s Vishvjyoti Trading Ltd by the assessee in F.Y.2014-15 and notice was issued. In compliance to the notice ... credit on allotment, split, sale of shares and relied on the various factual aspects of share trends, modus operandi and report of the Kolkata Investigation Wing statements recorded, ITDA data, BSE data and has doubted the earning of long term capital gains on shares. Further the AO has issued summons

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Hetu Investment and Trading Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 1917/MUM/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Priyank GhaiFor Respondent: Shri P D Chougule

Section 147

sales accommodation entries provided by the Assessee. 5. Subsequently, reassessment proceedings were initiated against the Assessee on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing that the Assessee was engaged in providing bogus purchase/sale accommodation entries. Vide Assessment Order dated, 10/12/2019, passed under Section 147 read with

ITO-41(4)(1), Mumbai vs. Chirania Trading LLP, Mumbai

ITA 150/MUM/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 150/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) ITA No. 993/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) ITA No. 992/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer 41(4)(1), Mumbai Kautilya Bhavan, BKC, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 Maharashtra Appellant Vs Chirania Trading LLP, Mumbai 914, Corporate Annex, Near Udyog Bhavan, Sonawala Lane, Goregaon East Mumbai-4000

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri H. M. Bhatt/Shri Raj Singh

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

DCIT 15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Antony Motors P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee & revenue stands partly allowed

ITA 724/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Smt Renu Jauhri[Assessment Year: 2009-10] [Assessment Year: 2008-09] [Assessment Year: 2007-08] Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Antony Motors Pvt. Income-Tax- 15(1)(1) Ltd. Room No.517, A-390/391, 5Th Floor, Midc, Ttc, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Industrial Zone, Maharshi Karve Road, Navi Mumbai- 400701. Mumbai- 400020. Pan: Aaaca4719K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande – Sr. A.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148

order was passed on 31/12/2011 determining total income in the hands of assessee at ₹3,06,60,843/-. 3.1. Subsequently, information was received from investigation wing of the Income tax department, Mumbai that sales tax department recorded statements of certain hawala operators, who confirmed to have given bogus bills

DCIT 15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Antony Motors P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee & revenue stands partly allowed

ITA 723/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande – Sr. A.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148

DCIT 15(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Antony Motors P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee & revenue stands partly allowed

ITA 722/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande – Sr. A.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 148

Sanjay Kumar Prop Shree Balaji Oil Mil, Bhiwani vs. DCIT Central Circle-I, Gurgaon

In the result, the approvals granted in the cases before us are established to be invalid and consequential assessments not sustainable

ITA 429/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2014-15 Sanjay Kumar, Vs Dcit, Prop. Shree Balaji Oil Mill, Central Circle-I, Ch. Dadri, Raillway Road, Gurgaon. Bhiwani, Haryana – 127 306. Pan: Aicpk8564H Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sunil Gupta, Vs Dcit, Prop. M/S Op Cotton & Oil Mills, Central Circle-I, Charkhi Dadri, Gurgaon. Bhiwani, Haryana. Pan: Aerpp6633H

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CA &For Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT-DR

Section 127(2)Section 153D

JCIT is involved with the search assessment proceedings right from the time of receipt of appraisal report from the Investigation Wing, still, the ld. JCIT, while granting the approval u/s 153D of the Act has to independently apply SEH Realtors Pvt. Ltd his mind dehors the conclusions drawn either ... Investigation Wing in the appraisal report or by the Ld. AO in the draft assessment order. The copy of the appraisal report submitted by the Investigation Wing to the Ld. AO and ld. JCIT are merely guidance to the Ld. AO and are purely internal correspondences on which the assessee

Agl Technologies Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-1(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4692/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.4692/िद"ी/2019 (िन.व. 2010-11) M/S Agl Technologies Ltd., S-206, First Floor, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi 110017 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aaeca-1070-B बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Room No. 153A, C.R Building, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent I.P Estate0, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Anuj Jain, Chartered Accountant "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 13/08/2024 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 30/10/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 26.03.2019, For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Solitary Ground Raised By The Assessee In Appeal Is Against The Addition Of Rs.1 Crore U/S. 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act’).

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Jain, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

issued to the assessee on 28.03.2017. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened assessment on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing that the assessee had taken accommodation entry of bogus loan Rs.1 crore from M/s. Index Securities and Research P. Ltd. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset ... submitted that reopening is bad in law as the assessment has been reopened merely on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing. The AO has not applied his mind independently, thus, the reasons to believe for reopening of assessment are borrowed. He further submitted that basis of addition

Heritage Hospitals Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

ITA 4090/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

unsecured loan. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently argued that the Assessing Officer is merely relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and the Assessing Officer has not disproved the affidavits filed by the directors of the subscriber company. The directors have appeared personally

Asstt. CIT Central Circle-2, Kanpur vs. Zain Alam, Kanpur

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed, whereas the five Cross Objections filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 237/LKW/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2019-20 The Acit V. Tabrez Alam Central Circle – 2 16B/4E, Sultan Tanners Kanpur Compound Jajmau, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aarpa0261A (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.06/Lkw/2023 [In Ita No.233/Lkw/2022] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Tabrez Alam V. The Acit 16B/4E, Sultan Tanners Central Circle – 2 Compound Kanpur Jajmau, Kanpur Tan/Pan: Aarpa0261A (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Acit V. Mehtab Alam Central Circle – 2 16B/4E, Sultan Tanners Kanpur Compound Jajmau, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aarpa0259L (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.07/Lkw/2023 [In Ita No.234/Lkw/2022] Assessment Year: 2019-20 Mehtab Alam V. The Acit 16B/4E, Sultan Tanners Central Circle – 2 Compound Kanpur Jajmau, Kanpur Tan/Pan: Bezps4971J

Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69

group, admitted in his statement on oath that profit was earned from trading of goat and bovine animals. In the affidavit filed before the Investigation Wing, Kanpur on 04.06.2018, the assessee had also admitted that she had carried out trading of goat/bovine/sheep and had earned profit from the same

Asstt.CIT, Central Circle-2, Kanpur vs. Zaina Fatima Ahmad, Kanpur

Appeals of the Department stand dismissed, whereas the five Cross Objections filed by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 236/LKW/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69