“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

Ashok Vitthal Nachankar, Ratnagiri vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ratnagiri

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 602/PUN/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav K Singh

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

government servant, who filed his return of income on 11.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.2,34,350/-. Information was received from the Investigation Wing, Kolhapur that the assessee has purchased twin bungalows in Mirjole for Rs.7.50 lacs for which he made cash payments. Further, there were certain credit entries

Rakesh Kumar Jain, Hyderabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 67/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accounant Member Assessment Year: 2020-21 Rakesh Kumar Jain, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 1-10-1/ 1, Flat No.301, Income Tax, Ratna Rekha Apartment, Central Circle – 1(4), Hyderabad – 500020, Hyderabad. Telangana. Pan : Alzpj1233A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri B. Bala Krishna, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2020-21 Arises From Order Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Hyderabad (“ Ld. Pcit”) Dt.06.11.2023 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”). 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 11Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)Section 153DSection 263Section 44ASection 69A

learned Pr. Commissioners assumption of applicability of section 11 5BBE is not germinated from any enquiries/facts/records of the Assessing Officer and the investigation wing. The assumption is only an opinion therefore, the learned Commissioner erred in directing the Assessing Officer to assess the income as unexplained cash under the provisions ... r.w.s 115BBE of the IT Act. 3. The learned Pr.Commissioner ought to have appreciated the facts and circumstances of the proceedings before the investigation wing and statements recorded therein and also the affidavit filed before the Assessing Officer, therefore, erred in directing the Assessing Officer to assess the Income

Kishore Ghevarchand Jain, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Kalyan

In the result, the appeal is allowed in aforesaid terms

ITA 278/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2015-16 Mr. Kishor Ghevarchand Jain Circle -1, Kalyan D.C.I.T. 3Rd Floor, 1St Floor, Porwal Bhawan, Mohan Plaza, Vs. Near Vaishya Mandir Hall, Wayale Nagar, Kasarhat, Kalyan Khadak Pada, Thane - 421301. Kalyan (W.) - 421301. Pan: Aazpj6248E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The „Act‟ In Short] Vide Its Din & Order No. Itba/ Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1057548827(1) Dated 31/10/2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Following Ground Of Appeal Have Been Raised:

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT), Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 5Section 69Section 69C

erred in initiating proceedings u/s.147 a. Although it was to be issued by the FAO b. merely on the information received from investigation wing without application of mind; c. on suspicion and doubts and for making roving enquiries d. without making any independent inquiry himself; e. Without any new tangible

Suresh Maheshwari HUF, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner on Income-Tax-25(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3904/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Suresh Maheshwari Huf Dy. Commissioner Of 431, Akshay Girikunj, Income –Tax-25(1), Bldg.- 3, Parliament Road, Vs. Room No. 206, 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Andheri (West) – 400058. Andheri Railway Station S.O. Tardeo Road, Pan: Aabhs3934A Mumbai- 400007. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Shah, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Prashant Mahajan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The „Act‟ In Short] Dated 21/09/2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Following Grounds Have Been Raised In Ita No. 3904/M/ 2023:-

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Mahajan, Sr. D.R

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

duly process u/s. 143(1) of the IT Act, 1961. Subsequently, information was received in the ITD system of the IT Department from investigation wing of the IT Department, Calcutta that accommodation entries were provided by the entry providers where unaccounted cash was introduced through a layer of transaction ... manipulation in the transactions of shares the same cannot be treated as bogus simply on the basis of the investigation carried out by the investigation wing of the Income Tax Department. The SEBI has also not pointed out any specific instance of rigging in shares in the case

Suresh Maheshwari HUF, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner on Income-Tax-25(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 3903/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Suresh Maheshwari Huf Dy. Commissioner Of 431, Akshay Girikunj, Income –Tax-25(1), Bldg.- 3, Parliament Road, Vs. Room No. 206, 2Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Andheri (West) – 400058. Andheri Railway Station S.O. Tardeo Road, Pan: Aabhs3934A Mumbai- 400007. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Shah, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Prashant Mahajan, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 07 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per : Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Appellant Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act [The „Act‟ In Short] Dated 21/09/2023 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Following Grounds Have Been Raised In Ita No. 3903 Of 2023 Are As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Mahajan, Sr. D.R

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68Section 69Section 69C

Rs.8,04,000/-, thereby resulting into Long Term Capital Gains of Rs.7,91,252/-. 4. It was found by the AO that the investigation wing of the Income Tax Department, Calcutta had undertaken investigation into 84 penny stocks and found that accommodation entries were provided by the entry providers where ... manipulation in the transactions of shares the same cannot be treated as bogus simply on the basis of the investigation carried out by the investigation wing of the Income Tax Department. The SEBI has also not pointed out any specific instance of rigging in shares in the case

Sandeep Kumar Agarwal, Jagatpur vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi, Cuttack

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 80/CTK/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Sandeep Kumar Kumar Agarwal, Agarwal, Vs. Acit, Nfac, Delhi/Cuttack Acit, Nfac, Delhi/Cuttack C/O. Agarwal Spices & C/O. Agarwal Spices & Food Processors Pvt Ltd., Food Processors Pvt Ltd., Jagatpur. Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aarpa 8064 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mohit Sheth Mohit Sheth, Adv Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Ld Sr Dr , Ld Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 28/0 05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/0 /05/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Mohit ShethFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, ld Sr DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 148

evidence produced by the revenue to show that the broker engaged by the assessee was one of the operator identified by the investigation wing at Kolkata as an entry operator. The assessee’s name has also not been mentioned by any of the operators, whom the revenue has investigated ... held against the assessee therein. The addition in the case of Anip Rastogi was based on a statement recorded from the brokers and the investigation wing’s report in respect of bogus claim of long term capital gain. Clearly the facts in the assessee’s case are different from that

Bindu Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 380/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.380/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

served on the assessee. Further, the AO had added back a sum of Rs.35,00,000/- on the basis of report received from the Investigation Wing of the Department that the said amount was received by the assessee from one M/s. Barbaric Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The assessee aggrieved with this

ITO41(2)(3), Mumbai, Bkc vs. Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue

ITA 4828/MUM/2023[2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Ito 29(2)(2), 2B/101, Jain Upashraya Lane, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Tagore Nagar, Vikhroli East, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito 41(2)(3), Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Room No. 732, Om Sai Chs, Bldg. No. 2, B-Wing, Kautilya Bhavan, Bkc, Vs. Flat No. 101, Opp Bharat Nagar Mumbai-400051. Jain Upashraya Lane, Vikhroli (E), Mumbai-400083. Pan No. Acgpl 0296 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Shinde, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Mandar Vaidya

Section 1Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

filed on 14.10.2010 declaring total income at Rs.2,07,530/ Rs.2,07,530/-. Subsequently, on receipt of . Subsequently, on receipt of information from the Investigation Wing information from the Investigation Wing of the Income of the Income-tax Department that assessee availed bogus purchase bills from Department that assessee availed ... assessee. We fi by the assessee. We find that the Assessing Officer received nd that the Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing that assessee received information from the Investigation Wing that assessee received information from the Investigation Wing that assessee received Nirmit Jatin Lathia ITA Nos. 4784, 4828/MUM/2023

Nirmit Jatin Lathia, Mumbai vs. ITO 29(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue

ITA 4784/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Shinde, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Mandar Vaidya

Section 1Section 129Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

Income Tax Officer-27(3)(1), Mumbai City vs. Ravi Shankar Shendge Legal Heir of Late Smt. Suchita Ravi Shendge, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2609/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Sujatha Iyangar, Sr.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay N. Kapadia

Section 133Section 148Section 68

discharge the burden shifter to his shoulders by disproving those documents. We notice that the AO simply relied upon the information received from investigation wing and did not make any independent enquiry except issuing notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. Accordingly, following the above said decision, we hold that

Rajesh Goyal, New Delhi vs. DCIT CC-14, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and as a consequential effect, impugned assessment is quashed

ITA 331/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2011-12 Rajesh Goyal Vs. Dcit Ff, Plot No.32, Road No.43, Cc-14 West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi New Delhi Pan No.Aalpg2490F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Sh. Madhur Aggarwal, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Sapna Bhatia, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 26/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/05/2024

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 250

assessment, examining the modus operandi of the sham transactions involving sale of equity shares of M/s. Shree Securities Limited, as done by Investigation Wing at Kolkata assessee was show caused for which the assessee had filed response as under :- “In this regard we would like to submit that the assessee ... reopening all the valid grounds were raised but same were not considered. The Ld. Senior Counsel submitted that the reasons were recorded merely relying Investigation Wing report. It was pointed out that AO has relied statement of Ajay Anand Pugalia alleged entry operator but whose statement was not on record

Bhim Sain Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 47(1), New Delhi

ITA 3232/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254Section 50C

matter back to the CIT(A). Meanwhile [during the set aside proceedings before the CIT(A)], the AO received certain information from the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department. Based on that information, the AO reopened the case under section 147 of the Act. Vide order dated

ITO, Ward-52(2), New Delhi vs. Gaurav Khullar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7752/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarasstt. Year: 2010-11 Ito Ward-52(2) Vs. Gaurav Khullar New Delhi. A-301/6. Dr. A.P.J Kalam Marg, New Delhi – 110 011 Pan Aaypk9694G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anu Krishna Aggarwal

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)

possession about escapement of income to initiate the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act, which was not explained by the assessee even before the Investigation Wing when confronted to him?” 10. Learned representative for the department submitted that three copies of ground of appeal duly signed and forwarded ... about escapement of income to initiate the proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act which was not explained by the assessee even before the Investigation Wing when confronted. So impugned order may be set aside. 12. Learned Representative for assessee submitted that the reopening of assessment on basis of erroneous

ACIT, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad vs. Venkata Praneeth Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 339/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 279/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Venkata Praneeth Vs. Acit Developers (P) Ltd, Central Circle 3(3) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv4975A (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 339/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Vs. Venkata Praneeth Central Circle 3(3) Developers (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaccv4975A (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Pranav, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/05/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/05/2024

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

undisclosed income in the statement dated 23.11.2019. It was submitted that the reliance of the learned CIT (A) on the affidavit filed before the Investigation Wing on 11.5.2020 is not permissible. 13. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Firstly, we will deal with ... flats and receiving additional consideration from them. In fact, the learned CIT (A) had mentioned about the affidavit filed by the assessee before the Investigation Wing at Page 27 of the order. It was mentioned by the learned CIT (A) that the assessee had admitted the total income of Rs.34

Venkata Praneeth Developers Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 279/HYD/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 May 2024AY 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Pranav, DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Income Tax Officer, Mumbai vs. S P International, Mumbai

Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A). All the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed as being without merit

ITA 430/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

establish the genuineness. In the instant case, there is uncontroverted evidence regarding the bogus nature of the purchases from an impeccable source i.e the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department and the evidences include admission from the so called sellers that they have been issuing bogus bills

Jignesh Suresh Shah, Palghar vs. ITO Ward-1, Palghar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3832/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271BSection 44ASection 69ASection 69C

Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act on the basis of information received from the investigation wing of the Revenue Department and consequently notice under section 148 of 2 Shri Jignesh Suresh Shah the Act dated 28.03.2019 was issued to the assessee

Income Tax Officer-42(1)(2), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhawan vs. Dheeraj Babulal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3320/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicialmember & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar Singh, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair,Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 69Section 69ASection 69C

income at Rs.1,83,630/-. Case of the assessee was re- opened by issuing notice u/s. 148, dated 26.03.2019. Based on information from the investigation wing of the Department that, the assessee had transacted in certain shares characterised by the Department as penny scrips. After necessary investigation and examination, this ... Securities Ltd. against whom there are no complaints or allegations of any nature either by SEBI or any other law enforcement agency or the investigation wing of the Department for any manipulation or price rigging. It was also submitted that the said broker had not been alleged

DCIT 19 3, Mumbai vs. Sanjiv Mahendra Parikh, Mumbai

ITA 3515/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Veerbhandra Mahajan

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

made by the AO without appreciating the facts of the case and modus operandi as a detailed investigation has been carried out by the Investigation Wing in respect of Client Code modification Transactions done by Anand Rathi Commodities Pvt. Ltd. where the assessee name has been surfaced and a detailed ... finding has been given by the Investigation Wing. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO without appreciating the facts that in such Client Code Modification Transactions, trading transactions of purchase

Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, Fatehabad vs. DCIT, CC-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 80/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 20/01/2023 In Appeal No. 10853/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For The A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 20/01/2023 Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The Impugned Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishaba Marwaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 253Section 68

survey action was carried at the business premises of the assessee on 14.09.2018. Then after the survey proceedings, in the income tax department (investigation wing), the assessee vide its surrender letter dated 17.09.2018 surrendered an amount 45,00,000/- on account of under billing receipts from functions in hotel