← All Phrases

“investigation wing”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 14712,584 judgments

The decision most relied on for investigation wing is Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (329 ITR 110), cited in 217 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on investigation wing

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
97
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.

PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57
417 ITR 334 · 2019 · High Court
96
citing judgments

An assessment completed under Section 143(3) cannot be reopened after four years solely based on third-party information or opinions, such as from an Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer applying their own independent mind to the material and having new, independent material on record.

ITO v. Purushottam Das Bangur
224 ITR 362 · 1997 · Supreme Court
90
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
81
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
78
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.

Aradhna Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
91 Taxmann.com 119 · 2018 · High Court
56
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer is justified in reopening assessment proceedings based on information received from the Investigation Wing, even when recording findings also rely on documents already on record, provided all procedural requirements for reassessment are met.

Judgments citing investigation wing

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1084/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate Represented by Department : Dr. Narendra Kumar NFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 11/11/2025
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

Taxmann.com 64 (SC), where it is enunciated that, “the entire disallowance in this case is based on third party information gathered by the Investigation Wing of the Department, which have not been independently subjected to further verification by the AO who has not provided the copy of such statements

ACIT., Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1083/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Sood(Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1083/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Industries आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1084/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारणवर्ष/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Hydeabad. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) Vs. Penna Cement Industries Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcp2290D (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) करदाताकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Sourabh Soparkar, Advocate राजस्वकाप्रतिनिधित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाईसमाप्तहोनेकीतिथि/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 11/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 2

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 68Section 80Section 801ASection 80GSection 92C

Taxmann.com 64 (SC), where it is enunciated that, “the entire disallowance in this case is based on third party information gathered by the Investigation Wing of the Department, which have not been independently subjected to further verification by the AO who has not provided the copy of such statements

Harvest Agriculture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7396/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & Harvest Agriculture Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 104 Natwar Chambers 94 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai- 400023 Pan/Gir No. Aabch6761P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 19Section 250Section 271ASection 31Section 68

years under consideration, the assessments were originally completed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, information was received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, based on a search and survey action conducted on 08.12.2021 in the case of Invent Assets Securitisation and Reconstruction ... that no addition was warranted under section 68 of the Act merely on the basis of third-party information received from the Investigation Wing. The Assessing Officer, however, was not satisfied with the explanations furnished and proceeded to make additions as discussed above. 5. Aggrieved by the reassessment orders

Harvest Agriculture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7395/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & Harvest Agriculture Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 104 Natwar Chambers 94 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai- 400023 Pan/Gir No. Aabch6761P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 19Section 250Section 271ASection 31Section 68

years under consideration, the assessments were originally completed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, information was received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, based on a search and survey action conducted on 08.12.2021 in the case of Invent Assets Securitisation and Reconstruction ... that no addition was warranted under section 68 of the Act merely on the basis of third-party information received from the Investigation Wing. The Assessing Officer, however, was not satisfied with the explanations furnished and proceeded to make additions as discussed above. 5. Aggrieved by the reassessment orders

Harvest Agriculture Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 2(1)(3), Mumbai

ITA 7393/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar & & Harvest Agriculture Ito Ward 2(1)(3) Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 104 Natwar Chambers 94 Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai- 400023 Pan/Gir No. Aabch6761P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ms. Ridhisha Jain, Ca Revenue By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 19Section 250Section 271ASection 31Section 68

years under consideration, the assessments were originally completed under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, information was received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, based on a search and survey action conducted on 08.12.2021 in the case of Invent Assets Securitisation and Reconstruction ... that no addition was warranted under section 68 of the Act merely on the basis of third-party information received from the Investigation Wing. The Assessing Officer, however, was not satisfied with the explanations furnished and proceeded to make additions as discussed above. 5. Aggrieved by the reassessment orders

DCIT Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Nissim Traders Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6538/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Dcit, Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai Nissim Traders Private Limited 552, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Vs E-203, Guruprasad Plot No. 5, S.S. M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400020. Nagar, Cross Road No. 2, Andheri East, Azad Nagar, Mumbai – 400053. [Pan: Aabcn3760G] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee

Section 115JSection 254(1)

assessee is beneficiary of purchases shown from M/s. Lakshin Infradev P. Ltd. and M/s. Nutan Enterprises aggregating of Rs. 11,65,922/-. The Investigation Wing made a full-fledged investigation in respect of hawala dealers. The assessing officer on the basis of such credible information treated the purchases from both

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5375/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

Subsequently, Subsequently, Subsequently, the the the learned learned learned Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer received received received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax information from the Investigation Wing of the Income information from the Investigation Wing of the Income Department alleging Department alleging that the assessee ... premises of such genuine business activity was found at the premises of such concerns. 4.2 On the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing formed a view that the entities controlled

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5374/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 4.1 Subsequently, the learned Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department alleging that the assessee had obtained accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans and share application money from certain concerns controlled ... goods or evidence of genuine business activity was found at the premises of such concerns. 4.2 On the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing formed a view that the entities controlled by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain were engaged in providing accommodation entries. It was further reported that

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5373/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 4.1 Subsequently, the learned Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department alleging that the assessee had obtained accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans and share application money from certain concerns controlled ... goods or evidence of genuine business activity was found at the premises of such concerns. 4.2 On the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing formed a view that the entities controlled by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain were engaged in providing accommodation entries. It was further reported that

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5372/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan()

For Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 250Section 68

Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 4.1 Subsequently, the learned Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department alleging that the assessee had obtained accommodation entries in the nature of unsecured loans and share application money from certain concerns controlled ... goods or evidence of genuine business activity was found at the premises of such concerns. 4.2 On the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing formed a view that the entities controlled by Shri Praveen Kumar Jain were engaged in providing accommodation entries. It was further reported that

Dona Builders Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5371/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

Subsequently, Subsequently, Subsequently, the the the learned learned learned Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer received received received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax information from the Investigation Wing of the Income information from the Investigation Wing of the Income Department alleging Department alleging that the assessee ... premises of such genuine business activity was found at the premises of such concerns. 4.2 On the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing the basis of the above material, the Investigation Wing formed a view that the entities controlled

Income Tax Officer, Faridabad vs. Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Faridabad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA No.521/Del/2025 for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 523/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Akash Ojha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

Income Tax Officer, Faridabad vs. Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Faridabad

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA No.521/Del/2025 for AY 2015-16 is dismissed

ITA 522/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Akash Ojha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

M/S. South West Pinnacle Exploration Limited, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Circle-24(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4076/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarm/S. South West Pinnacle Exploration Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 24 (1), Plot No.6, 4Th Floor, Sector 44, New Delhi. Gurugram – 122 003 (Haryana). (Pan : Aakcs3608R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri I.P. Bansal, Advocate Shri Vivek Bansal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.11.2026 Date Of Order : 21.01.2026 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit (A)”, For Short] Dated 17.06.2025 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Issues Involved In The Present Appeal Are Squarely Covered By Various Decisions & He Heavily Relied Upon The Decision Of The Coordinate Bench In The Case Of Real Innerspring Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit (2025) 174

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the AO has initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing and search proceedings in the case of Shri Verma. It is brought on record that these two companies were found to be controlled

South West Pinnacle Exploration Limited, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 24(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3834/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumarm/S. South West Pinnacle Exploration Limited, Vs. Acit, Circle 24 (1), A-4, Pushpanjali Farms, Bijwasan, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 061. (Pan : Aakcs3608R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri I.P. Bansal, Advocate Shri Vivek Bansal, Advocate Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2026 Date Of Order : 21.01.2026 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit (A)”, For Short] Dated 29.05.2025 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Issues Involved In The Present Appeal Are Squarely Covered By Various Decisions & He Heavily Relied Upon The Decision Of The Coordinate Bench In The Case Of Real Innerspring Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit (2025) 174

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the AO has initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing and search proceedings in the case of Shri Verma. It is brought on record that these two companies were found to be controlled

Gautam Chopra, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Jhandewallan Extension

ITA 2567/DEL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 69C

facts and circumstances of the case, the initiation of re- assessment proceedings is merely on the basis of provisional and unsubstantiated information received from investigation wing and in absence of any independent application of mind or enquiry, the reopening u/s. 148 is wholly based on borrowed satisfaction ... sustainable for want of tangible/adverse material. 1.2 That information from investigation wing per se does not constitute tangible material and there being no other adverse material on record, the reopening u/s. 148 is illegal and not sustainable. 1.3 That there being no evidence of any cash transaction brought on record

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Ravi Bharadwaj, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 2232/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143

website of International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) regarding Indians having undisclosed foreign companies and assets offshore. Investigation was carried out by the Investigation Wing, Delhi. Investigations revealed that an Indian resident, Sh. Ravi Bharadwaj was Director and shareholder of a BVI Company, namely M/s Lazare International Group Limited, incorporated ... Enquiry was initiated by investigation Wing, Delhi and letters/summons were issued to the above person. However, the assessee did not comply with letters/summons. Thereafter, information was sought by Competent Authority of British Virgin Island (“BVI”) under the Tax Information Exchange Agreement ("TIE-A”) between India and BVI. Information was received

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Ravi Bharadwaj, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 2231/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143

website of International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) regarding Indians having undisclosed foreign companies and assets offshore. Investigation was carried out by the Investigation Wing, Delhi. Investigations revealed that an Indian resident, Sh. Ravi Bharadwaj was Director and shareholder of a BVI Company, namely M/s Lazare International Group Limited, incorporated ... Enquiry was initiated by investigation Wing, Delhi and letters/summons were issued to the above person. However, the assessee did not comply with letters/summons. Thereafter, information was sought by Competent Authority of British Virgin Island (“BVI”) under the Tax Information Exchange Agreement ("TIE-A”) between India and BVI. Information was received

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Ravi Bharadwaj, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue for the AY 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 2230/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143

website of International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) regarding Indians having undisclosed foreign companies and assets offshore. Investigation was carried out by the Investigation Wing, Delhi. Investigations revealed that an Indian resident, Sh. Ravi Bharadwaj was Director and shareholder of a BVI Company, namely M/s Lazare International Group Limited, incorporated ... Enquiry was initiated by investigation Wing, Delhi and letters/summons were issued to the above person. However, the assessee did not comply with letters/summons. Thereafter, information was sought by Competent Authority of British Virgin Island (“BVI”) under the Tax Information Exchange Agreement ("TIE-A”) between India and BVI. Information was received

Jan Abhivyakti Samajik Vikas Sanstha, Raipur vs. Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 New Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5565/DEL/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla[Assessment Year: 2024-25] Jan Abhivyankti Samajik Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vikas Sanstha, Lig-1361, (Central)-2, Room No.341, E-2, Sector-8, Housing Board Vs 2Nd Floor, Ara Centre, Colony, Saddu Mova, Raipur- Jhandewalan Extension, 492001 (C.G.) New Delhi-110055 Pan:Aabaj7197B Appellant Respondent Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By Shri Mukesh Kumar Jha, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

Section 12ASection 133A

dated 25.09.2024, a survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted on 07.09.2022 in the case of Centre for Policy Research by the Investigation Wing of the Department. Information qua deficiencies, short comings, irregularities noted were shared with DCIT, Central Circle-14, Delhi which was subsequently shared with