“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

P.L. Goenka HUF, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 29/4, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 412/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri K.M. Roy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Patra, Addl. CIT, D/R

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250

Officer for framing the reasons and the reopening is merely on the basis of borrowed satisfaction in the form of information received from the investigation wing. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessee’s case, reads as under:- “ Name of the assessee P. L. Goenka ... original/ reopened assessment proceedings along with time period/ date of collection or receipt of information, in the cases where information is received from the investigation Wing or any other law enforcement agency, details of letter, brief summary of information along with relevant portion of such report and details of relied

Goldwin Fincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Kolkata.

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

ITA 1255/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg&Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 147Section 148Section 250

Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (in short the “AO”) received an information from the Investigation Wing that the assessee had made bogus transactions in the shares of Aricent Infra Ltd. during the year which was 3 I.T.A. No.1255/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Goldwin Fincom

Ajmer Industries LLP, Naya Bazar Ajmer vs. DCIT Central Circle Ajmer, Jaipur Road Ajmer

In the result, three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 760/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. C. M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)

Section 132Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

accounts and estimation of income and bring the evidence to unearth or quantify the said income as undisclosed income. Neither the A.O. nor the investigation wing linked the sales recorded in the iPhone in the nature of undisclosed income. Therefore, we are unable to accept the contention of the revenue

Prem Prakash Agarwal, Naya Bazar Ajmer vs. DCIT Central Circle Ajmer, Jaipur Road Ajmer

In the result, three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 759/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Feb 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. C. M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)

Section 132Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

Prem Prakash Agarwal, Naya Bazar Ajmer vs. DCIT Central Circle Ajmer, Jaipur Road Ajmer

In the result, three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 758/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. C. M. Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)

Section 132Section 153ASection 271ASection 274

Sheetal Impex P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2053/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

received. 3. That the Notice U/s 148 is bad in law in so far as it is based on material discretely collected by the Investigation Wing and mechanically relied upon by Ld AO without verifying the credibility of information which was false & blatantly contrary to information available on record

H S Impex Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-11(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 149/DEL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

which is for accommodation entry. I have also perused various materials and information along with bank statement available on record as received from the Investigation wing and or that basis it is observed that the assessee company has claimed the bogus billing amounting ... Links to reduce the taxable income for the year. On perusal of the documents on record as well as the information received from the investigation wing, I am satisfied and have reason to believe that the income of the assessee company amounting to Rs. 1,26,88,804/- has escaped

H S Impex Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-11(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 148/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Panel Commerce Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Kolkata.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1116/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

proceeding initiated by the ld. AO is bad in law as the same has been done only on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing without making any enquiry by the AO prior to reopening of assessment. He further stated that in the case of assessee there was neither

Lovely Promoters Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

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

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a

Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

order dated 20.03.2022. viii. The information was borrowed but not the satisfaction. The AO had duly analysed the information received from the Investigation wing and satisfied before issuing the notice wls 148. Thus, by carefully reading the above chronological events, I do not find any anomalies in reopening proceedings. Thus ... that of allegedly executing fraudulent trades in illiquid stock options by committing irregularities in the equity derivative segment. Operation Falcon scam unearthed after the investigation wing of the I-T Department launched 'Operation Falcon' and searched 22 brokerage offices in various cities, including Mumbai, Kolkata, Kanpur Hyderabad and the Nation

Manish Mahipatrai Shah, Mumbai vs. CIT(Appeal), Mumbai

ITA 867/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.867/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Manish Mahipatrai Shah बिधम/ Cit(A)/Nfac 404, Commerce House, Mumbai. Vs. Nagindas Master Road Fort, Mumbai-400023. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Asfps9884D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punamiya Revenue By: Shri Biswanath Das (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 30.03.2022 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Disallowing The Long Term Capital Gain (Ltcg) Claimed By The Assessee In Respect Of Sale Of Shares M/S. Sunrise Asian Limited (Hereafter “M/S. Sunrise”) Of Rs.11,89,44,328/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). & Thus Denying Deduction U/S 10(38) Of The Act As Well As Upholding Addition Of Rs.59,47,261/- As Commission For Arranging The Bogus Ltcg (5% Of Commission) U/S 69C Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunamiyaFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das (DR)

Section 10(38)Section 132(4)Section 147Section 68Section 69C

demated and the shares were sold through BSE/recognized stockbroker M/s. Hornic Investment Pvt. Ltd. However, the AO taking note of the report of the Investigation Wing (Kolkata) that the scrip of M/s. Sunrise was one of the eighty four (84) penny stocks that were 3 A.Y. 2014-15 Manish Mahipatrai ... form of LTCG which amount is exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. Thereafter, he took note of the investigation report of the investigation wing of the Department wherein the statement of Shri Vipul Bhatt was recorded on 09.02.2016 u/s 132(4) of the Act (and confirmed

DCIT Central Circle-16, New Delhi vs. Suboli Ice and Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and cross-objection

ITA 2143/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shrichalla Nagendra Prasad& Dr. Brr Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 132Section 133A

storage facility. During post survey inquiries, the assessee submitted list of 166 entities who regularly maintained the stock in the cold storage to the Investigation Wing. In the course of assessment proceedings pursuant to the survey, summon were issued to the 166 parties to furnish their month-wise, item-wise ... promoters, bank details etc. of the parties in whose case summons had returned back so that the parties could be identified by the Investigation Wing. 4. In the course of assessment proceedings, a detailed show cause notice was issued to the assessee to furnish supporting evidences, details to establish

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle.1(3), Ahmedabad vs. M/S.Aaryavart Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 154/AHD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-D.R

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153CSection 69A

assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act and in light of the fresh informative evidences received from the Income Tax Investigation Wing of Rajkot and after duly analysis of the same, it was observed that the appellant company failed to make full and true disclosure ... required to be quashed. Considering the totality of the fact of the case, I have observed that the AO was having information from the investigation wing of Rajkot. This information has been received after passing of the assessment order u/s 143(3) rws 153C of the Act dated 28/12/2018

The Dy. CIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Sagardeep Alloys Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1810/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

reopening the assessment. The assessee filed its objection, which was disposed of by the AO. Thereafter based on the statements recorded by the Investigation wing of the two individuals namely Mr.Palak Gajjar of M/s. Urvish Trading Company and M/s. Swiss Impex Private Limited, and Mr. Jagadish N Patel ... Paper Book). Thus Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that the A.O. without verification of records and merely based on the statements recorded by the Investigation Wing of the department made the additions, which are rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) after considering the reassessment orders passed in I.T.A No. 1810/Ahd/2019

Udaykumar Prabhudas Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 29(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 883/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudaykumar Prabhudas Shah V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 29(3)(1) Kautilya Bhavan 1601 Moksh Mahal Bandra Kurla Complex P.K. Road, Sarvodaynagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051 Mulund, Mumbai – 400080 Pan: Alyps8682D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Dharan Gandhi Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

sold the impugned script. What has been adopted by the AO for making the addition was the modus of operandi as highlighted by the investigation wing of Kolkata. To our understanding, the mere modus of operandi cannot the basis of making the addition or treating the capital gain as bogus ... under section 10(38), in a preplanned manner to evade taxes. The AO extensively relied upon the search and survey operations conducted by the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department in Kolkata, Delhi, Mumbai and Ahmedabad on penny stocks, which sets out the modus operandi adopted in the business

Bharat De vs. Hi Dagha, Thanevs.ITO Ward 3(1), Kalyan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3315/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 Bharat Devshi Dagha, Ito, Ward 3(1), 3/13, Geet Govind Chs. Rani Mansion Manpada Road, Vs. Maharashtra-421301. Dombivli East-421 201. Pan No. Aarpd 9399 Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Kalpesh Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Kumar Meena, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

respectively. 3.1 Subsequently, the Assessing Officer received information from Subsequently, the Assessing Officer received information from Subsequently, the Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing of the Income the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department that during tax Department that during assessment year 2009 assessment year ... fresh information in the form of letter dated order that fresh information in the form of letter dated 6. 06/02/2013 was received from the Investigation Wing informing 06/02/2013 was received from the Investigation Wing informing 06/02/2013 was received from the Investigation Wing informing that the assessee is a beneficiary

Bharat De vs. Hi Dagha, Thanevs.ITO Ward 3(1), Kalyan

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3314/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Mr. Kalpesh Khatri, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Surendra Kumar Meena, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

Udayan Grover, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

term capital gain such as offline purchase of non-listed shares, unrealistic purchase price, details of trade data and exit providers, Money trial by Investigation Wing, Kolkata, Trade pattern and order placing mechanism, Role of broker, SEBI report and its finding with regard to accommodation entry providers (for the sake ... despite no fundamentals supporting the premium paid. The assessee did not give any explanation with regard to the adverse findings made by the SEBI, Investigation Wing, Kolkata and with regard to the information gathered u/s 133(6) of the I.T. Act. The assessee's contention that the evidence cited

Prashant Pitti, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3032/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2016-17 Prashant Pitti, Vs. Acit, C-179, Central Circle-4, Vivek Vihar, Delhi. New Delhi-110095. Pan Awxpp4522D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri P N Barnwal, CIT (DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 68Section 69A

purpose of receiving entry in the accounts of Sh. Prashant Pitti. It has also been reported by the investigation wing that on examination of bank statement of Sh. Prashant Pitti reveals that Rs. 30,00,000/- has been received through RTGS collectively from two entities Le. M/s Influence Software Architects

Dy. CIT Central Circle-19, Delhi vs. Amarjeet Singh, Delhi

ITA 2830/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. Amarjeet Singh, Central Circle-19, S-138, Greater Kailash, New Delhi Partt-Ii, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaipp3208R

For Appellant: Shri R. S. singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Safarul Haque Tanweer, CIT DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69C

from fixed deposits and rest from his firm M/s Punihani International. The statement given by the assessee was subsequently retracted on 8.8.2019 before the investigation wing . For the sake of convenience, the retraction statement dated 8.8.2019 placed on record by the ld. AR is reproduced below:- “Date 08th August