“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

Pradipkumar Harakchand Doshi, Mumbai vs. The ITO, Ward-19(2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2229/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blepradipkumar Harakchand Doshi V. Income Tax Officer – 19(2)(5) 94/100, 2Nd Floor Matru Mandir, Grant Road 2Nd Pathan Street Mumbai - 400007 Mumbai - 400004 Pan: Aahpd4722B (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Assessee Represented By : Department Represented By : Shri H.M. Bhatt

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 250

circumstantial evidence to show that the LTCG on sale of shares of Shree Shaline Textiles Ltd is not genuine one. c. Findings of Investigation wing: The findings of the Directorate of Investigatin of Mumbai and Kolkata as discussed above have proved that the assessee had worked out an arrangement ... Long term capital gains being exempt u/s.10(38) treating the same as not genuine on the basis of information in possession of the Investigation Wing, Kolkata that certain operators and intermediaries had provided accommodation entries of bogus Long term capital gains using certain penny stock companies and thereby further erred

Sridhar Yarlagadda, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 311/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.311/Viz/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Sridhar Yarlagadda, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Visakhapatnam. Ward-3(2), Pan: Abdpy4072 G Visakhapatnam. (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यधर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

thereby attracting the provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Your Appellant submits that an explanation was given before the Investigation Wing at Vizag and had filed an application under PMGKY, the cash deposits cannot be considered as unexplained under section 68 of the Income

Lgw Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-13(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is stands allowed

ITA 846/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 147

counsel for the assessee. We find that the assessing officer has reopened the assessment merely based on the information received from Investigation Wing without verifying the veracity and truthfulness of such information. The information was wrong and the reopening of the assessment on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without correlating

M/S. B.L. Tak and Sons (HUF), Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 34(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2622/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manish Borad&Shri Anikesh Banerjee]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

Unno Industries Ltd., M/s Tuni Textile Mill Ltd., M/s Nikki Global Ltd., M/s KDJ Holiday Ltd. and M/s Asianlak Capital Ltd. received from investigation wing which is against the principle of natural justice. 3.That the Ld. AO erred in law as well as in facts in applying principles of human ... statement of various persons recorded by the AO/investigation wing/search team in the course of other proceedings as well as the report of the Kolkata investigation wing, there is no reference to a direct evidence indicating that the transactions in question is in the nature of accommodation entry or for arranging

Raghav Petrochem Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 20(3), New Delhi

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

ITA 3437/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2012-13 Raghav Petrochem Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward 20(3), Delhi. Delhi. Pan Aaacr4540H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148

made from Reema Polychem Pvt Ltd (Rs. 7,30,11677) and Reema Polychem (Rs. 64,15,332) as bogus based on information received from investigation wing Delhi. 2.1 That the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by AO is contradictory since against the alleged bogus purchases

New Infrastructure Private Limited, Borivali(West) vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre

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

ITA 3859/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenew Infrastructure Private Limited V. Acit- 13(1)(1) 23, B, Ganjawala Apartment 218, 2Nd Floor Svp Road, Borivali (W) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai- 400092 Mumbai- 400020 Pan: Aaccn1678G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Bhupendra Shah Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Department Represented By :

Section 143Section 148Section 234Section 271Section 68

NFAC also erred in confirming the reopening u/s. 148 a. only on the basis of borrowed satisfaction b. relying upon information from Investigation wing c. third party statements d. overlooking earlier order passed u/s 143[3] dated 30- 3-2012 which amounts to change of opinion e. overlooking the fact

Bharat Vanmalibhai Modiya, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 25(2) (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 125/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Vanmalibhai Modiya, Income Tax Officer 25(2)(2), 503, Shree Krishna Bhuvan, Kautilya Bhavan, Dgit Vs. Dixit Road, Vile Parle (E), (Vigilance) (West) Avenue 3, Mumbai-400057. Near Videsh Bhavan, G Block Bkc, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aawpm 1067 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Bharat Kumar : Mr. Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 12/03/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/03/2024

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat Kumar

Section 143(1)Section 148

basis of th Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Subsequently, on the basis of th information received from the office of the DGIT Investigation Wing, information received from the office of the DGIT Investigation Wing, information received from the office of the DGIT Investigation Wing, Mumbai, the Assessing Officer recorded ... seen that the reason for reopening is on the on for reopening is on the basis of information received from the Investigation wing, Mumbai basis of information received from the Investigation wing, Mumbai basis of information received from the Investigation wing, Mumbai as per which the appellant has been mentioned

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Narsingh Ispat Ltd

ITAT/80/2024HC Calcutta11 Mar 2024

Bench: : The Hon’Ble The Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya Date : 11Th March, 2024 Appearance : M S. Smita Das De, Adv. Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …For Appellant Mr. Kartik Kurmy, Adv. (Vc) Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Subrata Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Debayan Dutta, Adv. …For Respondent. The Court : We Have Heard Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Standing Counsel Appearing For The Appellant Revenue & Mr. Kartik Kurmy, Learned Counsel Appearing For The Respondent Assessee. There Is A Delay Of 59 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Given By The Appellant Department For Not Preferring The Appeal Within The Period Of Limitation. Hence, The Condone Delay Petition Is Allowed & Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260ASection 68

done a similar exercise in M/s. Seaview Agencies Private Limited. It noted that in the assessment year 2011-12 information was received from the investigation wing of the department regarding unaccounted income received by M/s. Seaview Agencies Private Limited and accordingly, addition was made treating the same as unexplained cash ... credit under Section 68 of the Act. Similarly, for the assessment year 2012-13 there was another information from the investigation wing regarding the unaccounted income and this amount was also added to the total income. The CIT(A) perused the assessment orders for those two years which showed that

Rani Goenka, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 44(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1414/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

investments made in various schemes. Having observed so we find that the AO has not applied his mind independently to the report of the Investigation Wing and has recorded a fallacious conclusion that income of the assessee has escaped to the tune of Rs. 1.37 crores. We have also examined

M/S. Indovision Securities Limited., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1353/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No.1353/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Indovision Securities Ltd….…………............…...……………....Appellant Block B, Suit No.1A, 1St Floor Mangalam, 24 & 26 Hemanta Basu Sarani, Isi P.O S.O, Kolkata-1. [Pan: Aaaci5310G] Vs. Ito, Ward-6(2), Kolkata….….............................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 27, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 11, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 196 Days. A Separate Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed. Considering The Averments Made In The Application, The Delay In Filing The Present Appeal Is Hereby Condoned. 3. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Deciding The Appeal Ex-Parte When No Proper & Reasonable Opportunity Of Being Heard Was Granted.

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

passed on 31.03.2015 at an assessed income of Rs.3,26,54,590/-. Later on, information was received by the Assessing Officer from the Investigation Wing that the assessee was a beneficiary of Rs.4,70,50,000/- received by it through accommodation entry. The Assessing Officer therefore reopened the assessment ... Indovision Securities Ltd. 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that the Assessing Officer had received information from the Investigation Wing that the assessee has received accommodation entry and, therefore, the Assessing Officer was justified in reopening of the assessment. He has further submitted that even otherwise

Bharath Hi-Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 1034/BANG/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri.Inder Paul Bansal & Sri.Vivek BansalFor Respondent: Sri.Nilanjan Dey, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153ASection 250

said information was justified. In Eureka Stock and Share Broking Services Ltd. Vs CIT, 82 taxmann.com 10 (SC) it was held that where investigation wing of department had during course of investigation in case of a third party found that he was indulged in providing accommodation entries and bogus bills ... assessee was justified. In Avirat Star Homes Venture (P.) Ltd. Vs ITO, 102 taxmann.com 60 it was held that where information was received from investigation wing about certain companies that they were involved in giving accommodation entries of various natures to several beneficiaries and assessee was one of them, information

Alchemist Touchnology, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi

ITA 1689/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshalchemist Touchnology, Vs. Acit, Building No. 23, Nehru Central Circle-20, Place, Alchemist House, Delhi South Delhi-110019 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaica1617Q Assessee By : Shri N. K. Lal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 10/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Lal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 245D(1)Section 69

available on record. A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of Alchemist Group by the Investigation Wing of Chandigarh on 20.6.2014. The business activities of the group are mainly located at Chandigarh, Delhi, Kolkata, Mumbai, Patna and Varanasi. The corporate office

ACIT, Circle CC 15, New Delhi vs. Alka Mendiratta, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1864/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 153ASection 69

That there is no evidence that the persons whose names have been stated as witnesses in the ATS were ever examined by the Investigation wing or by the AO and they have confirmed that signatures of this ATS by A,B,C,D were put in their presence. 12. That ... verifying their signatures on ATS to rebut their statements cannot be undertaken. The witnesses have not been examined by the AO or the investigation wing, to ascertain that it was witnessed by them, for placing signature of all the entities on the ATS. In the absence of it, their statements

ACIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Yash Pal Mendiratta, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessees are also dismissed

ITA 1863/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Goel, CA &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 153ASection 69

Rajesh Gupta, New Delhi vs. JCIT, Spl, Range-14, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 726/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)

Income-Tax, Special Range-14, Delhi in framing the assessment by ignoring the basic principles of natural justice as the alleged report of the Investigation Wing was never confronted to the appellant.” ITA Nos. 251, 252/Del/2019 4. In ITA No. 1255/Del/2020, following grounds have been raised by the assessee

Sanjay Gupta, New Delhi vs. JCIT Special Range-14, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 725/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)

Sanjay Gupta, New Delhi vs. DCIT Special Range-14, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 1255/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)

Sanjay Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-40(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 252/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)

Rajesh Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-40(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 251/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Ludhiana vs. M/S Punjab Rice Land Pvt Ltd

The Appeals are dismissed

ITA/221/2023HC Punjab & Haryana06 Mar 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

Section 148

Page 3 of 3 found that the transactions of purchase by the assessee from various parties were genuine and the Investigation Wing could not provide any material in support of the allegations of accommodation entries through Sh.Raman Dalal. 9. Once a finding relating to the same transactions was found