“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

ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur vs. M/S. Uthangrai Sri Vidya Mandir Educational Trust, Krishnagiri

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2017-18 in ITA Nos

ITA 371/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.Gआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 370, 371 & 372 /Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 & C.O Nos.3, 4 & 5/Chny/2021 [In I.T.A. Nos.370, 371 & 372/Chny/2020] The Assistant M/S. Uthangarai Sri Vidya Commissioner Of Income Vs. Mandir Educational Trust, Tax, No.115, Ramamurthy Nagar, Circle-1, Uthangarai, Hosur. Krishnagiri – 635 207. Pan: Aadts 6092D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent / Cross Objector) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 M/S. Uthangarai Sri Vidya The Assistant Mandir Educational Trust, Vs. Commissioner Of Income No.115, Ramamurthy Nagar, Tax, Uthangarai, Circle-1, Krishnagiri – 635 207. Hosur. Pan: Aadts 6092D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 153A

Collector of Krishnagiri that the trust was having unaccounted cash to the tune of Rs.2.75 crores and gold coins of 245 grams. Accordingly, the investigation wing of the Income-tax Department issued warrant of authorization u/s.132 of the Act by Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Tamilnadu & Puducherry and accordingly, income

ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur vs. M/S. Uthangrai Sri Vidya Mandir Educational Trust, Krishnagiri

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2017-18 in ITA Nos

ITA 370/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 153A

G.S. Dream Home LLP, Ajmer vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed

ITA 24/JPR/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), Dr. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 144Section 153ASection 153CSection 69A

certain seized papers as Annexure 2 (PB 6-11). Thus it is evident that he only attached the report of Investigation Wing without recording his own satisfaction as to whether the seized paper/document has a bearing on determination of total income of assessee or not. The satisfaction so recorded

Rohit Devendra Goyal, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-33(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3704/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

relied upon the investigation report which primarily narrates general modus operandi. The learned Counsel pointed out that the ld.AO has merely relied upon the investigation wing of the Income Tax Department, who has identified M/s Unno Industries Ltd. as one of the penny stock on the basis of orders ... Industries Ltd was undertaken and the appeal was adjudicated against the assessee. Ld. DR further submitted that, once it has been found by the Investigation Wing of the Department that this scrip was used to provide accommodation entry, and on further analysis of the report AO has given his categorical

Surinder Films(P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-3(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1360/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1360/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Surinder Films (P) Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates Vs Circle-3(1), Kolkata Advocates Siddha Gibson 1, Gibson Lane Suite 213, 2Nd Floor Kolkata - 700069 [Pan : Aancs0075K] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Meena, Jcit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 23/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- 1. (A) For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Upholding The Validity Of Re-Opening Proceedings U/S 147 Which Was Without Jurisdiction & As Such, Not Sustainable In The Eyes Of Law. (B) For That The Purported Approval Granted By The Principal Cit - 1, Kolkata U/S 151, If Any, Does Not Fulfill The Requirements Of Law Thereby Vitiating The Entire Proceedings. 2. For That The Ld. Cit(A) Was Not Justified In Confirming The Addition Made By The A.O. Of Rs. 30,00,000/- On Account Of Unsecured Loan Received From Mirabelle Tradecom Pvt Ltd. U/S 68. 2

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Meena, JCIT, Sr. D/R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68Section 69C

entries, which information was given to him by the Directorate of Investigation, the AO stated: "I have also perused various materials and report from Investigation Wing and on that basis it is evident that the assessee company has introduced as unaccounted money in its bank account by way of above ... material and the formation of the reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment. In the present case too, the information received from the Investigation Wing cannot be said to be tangible material per se without a further inquiry being undertaken by the AO. In the present case

Shri Dinesh Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2624/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16 Amit Agarwal, Assistant Commissioner Of 49A, Tollygunge Circular Road, Vs. Income Tax, Central Circle- New Alipore, Kolkata-700053. 3(4), Kolkata. (Pan: Agapa0320R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

broker of the assessee to find out the genuinness of the transaction or to prove that the general statement in the report by the Investigation Wing fit in the case of the assessee. 4.1. In reference to the statement of Shri Debesh Upadhayay recorded

Shri Vijay Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2623/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Shri Amit Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC-3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2592/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Shri Shrey Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-3(40, Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2565/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Shri Mahesh Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2539/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Shri Kishore Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2530/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Shri Kamal Agarwal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata

In the result, all the seven appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2522/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah & Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barnab, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

Late Sh. Birdi Chand Through Legal Heir Mukesh Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 502/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl.CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 54F

above facts and circumstances of the appeal, ground Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed. 11 In this case, information was received from Investigation Wing of Jaipur that appellant along with other person sold land for total consideration of Rs. 11,03,09,005/-, of which 5 Late Sh. Birdi Chand

M/S City Shoppe Estates Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 42/KOL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Umakanta Dhrupati, Addl. CIT, DR

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 250Section 68

documents & evidences furnished by assessee to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the share subscriber companies and relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and Statement of third parties without independent verification and not allowing any opportunity of cross examination. 3. That the Ld. AO as well

Spectrum Foods Limited, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 38/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Apr 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Delhi) followed). (iv) ACIT vs. Devesh Kumar (ITAT Delhi)dt. 31.10.2014 Reopening solely on the basis of information received from the investigation wing & without independent application of mind is void. (v) Unique Metal Industries vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Delhi) dated 28.10.2015 Reopening solely on the basis of information received ... Income-tax 21 Spectrum Foods Limited vs ITO 5. [2023] 153 taxmann.com 25 Where Assessing Officer had received information from (Gujarat) HIGH COURT OF Investigation wing that assessee received accommodation GUJARAT Akshat Pramodkumar entry in penny scrip, which was bogus in nature and Chaudhary v. Deputy addition was required

Sheela Ashok Bafna, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 68

were jamakharchi/paper companies operating in Kolkata (AO has not specified which entities purchased shares from assessee). According to the AO, inquiry was conducted by Investigation Wing (Kolkata) had verified the cash trail (no details of cash-trail regarding assessee's case given); and then he discussed the general modus-operandi ... reply AO reproduced at para 13 (page 23- 26); and thereafter he expressed his dis-satisfaction and took note of the report of investigation wing (Kolkata) wherein the details of search conducted by the investigation wing on various entry operators/brokers were stated; and they had admitted of providing bogus LTCG/loss

Shrikant Ramesh Merchant, Mumbai vs. ACIT in Situ ITO -19 (3) (3), Mumbai

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

ITA 296/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail (Jm)

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 68

respect of long term capital gains arising on sale of shares of M/s. Shreenath Commercial & Finance Limited. The Assessing Officer received information from the investigation wing of the Kolkata that the shares of certain companies were manipulated to generate bogus long term capital gains. Such kinds of shares were termed ... penny stocks’. The AO noticed that the investigation wing has identified shares of M/s. Shreenath Commercial & Finance Ltd. as one of such penny stock shares. Hence the AO took the view that the long term capital gains declared by the assessee is bogus in nature and accordingly reopened assessment

Ipca Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the revenue for AYs 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2014-15 are partly allowed

ITA 881/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal (Adv)For Respondent: Shri K. C Selvamani (DR)

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 35Section 80I

taxmann.com 406) also held as under: “11. In the assessment proceedings Assessing Officer had relied upon information obtained from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Mumbai which in turn had obtained the information from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. The information was to the effect that ... Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. that the revenue is required to furnish the information received from the Sales Tax Department or from the Investigation Wing of the Department to the assessee allowing the assessee to test the & Others (Assessee & Revenue) A.Y Nos. 2009-10 to AY. 14-15 IPCA Laboratories

Ipca Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the

ITA 880/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 880/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 879/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 882/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 881/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 883/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ipca Laboratories Ltd 48 Kandivli Industries Estate, Charkop Kandivli West, Mumbai-400067. Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-5(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2563/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2565/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2567/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2569/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2571/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 35Section 80I

taxmann.com 406) also held as under: “11. In the assessment proceedings Assessing Officer had relied upon information obtained from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Mumbai which in turn had obtained the information from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. The information was to the effect that ... Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. that the revenue is required to furnish the information received from the Sales Tax Department or from the Investigation Wing of the Department to the assessee allowing the assessee to test the 46 ITA No.879 to 883/M/2021 & Others (Assessee & Revenue

Dy.CIT CC -5(2) Cent. RG. -5, Mumbai vs. M/S. Ipca Laboratories Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee as well as the

ITA 2571/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 880/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 879/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 882/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 881/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 883/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ipca Laboratories Ltd 48 Kandivli Industries Estate, Charkop Kandivli West, Mumbai-400067. बिधम/ Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-5(2) 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2563/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2009-10) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2565/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2567/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2569/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2571/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 35Section 80I

taxmann.com 406) also held as under: “11. In the assessment proceedings Assessing Officer had relied upon information obtained from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Mumbai which in turn had obtained the information from the Sales Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra. The information was to the effect that ... Nikunj Eximp Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. that the revenue is required to furnish the information received from the Sales Tax Department or from the Investigation Wing of the Department to the assessee allowing the assessee to test the ITA No.879 to 883/M/2021 & Others (Assessee & Revenue