← All Phrases

“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
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.

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.

Judgments citing investigation wing

M/S. Boscon Leather Products (P) Ltd., North 24 Pgs vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata.

In the result, all these appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 826/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos. 822 To 826/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2016-17 M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Dcit, Cir-11(1), Ltd. Kolkata Haripada Biswas Sarani, Michael Vs. Nagar, Sahara, North 24 Pgs. – 700133. Pan: Aabcb 1409 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Respondent By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dt. 14/06/2023 For Assessment Year 2012- 13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively. Since The Facts & Issues Are Identical & Similar In Nature, Therefore Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Taken As The Lead Case & The Result Of The Same Shall Be Followed For Subsequent Assessment Years I.E., 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 147

engaged in manufacturing of leather products and its income was from the said business. The Assessing Officer based on an information received from the investigation wing that Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh and his group concerns were indulged in providing accommodation entries through his three concerns and taking note that ... Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating: Thus, 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

M/S. Boscon Leather Products (P) Ltd., North 24 Pgs vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata.

In the result, all these appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 825/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos. 822 To 826/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2016-17 M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Dcit, Cir-11(1), Ltd. Kolkata Haripada Biswas Sarani, Michael Vs. Nagar, Sahara, North 24 Pgs. – 700133. Pan: Aabcb 1409 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Respondent By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dt. 14/06/2023 For Assessment Year 2012- 13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively. Since The Facts & Issues Are Identical & Similar In Nature, Therefore Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Taken As The Lead Case & The Result Of The Same Shall Be Followed For Subsequent Assessment Years I.E., 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 147

engaged in manufacturing of leather products and its income was from the said business. The Assessing Officer based on an information received from the investigation wing that Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh and his group concerns were indulged in providing accommodation entries through his three concerns and taking note that ... Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating: Thus, 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

M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Ltd., North 24Pgs vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, all these appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 824/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos. 822 To 826/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2016-17 M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Dcit, Cir-11(1), Ltd. Kolkata Haripada Biswas Sarani, Michael Vs. Nagar, Sahara, North 24 Pgs. – 700133. Pan: Aabcb 1409 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Respondent By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dt. 14/06/2023 For Assessment Year 2012- 13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively. Since The Facts & Issues Are Identical & Similar In Nature, Therefore Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Taken As The Lead Case & The Result Of The Same Shall Be Followed For Subsequent Assessment Years I.E., 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 147

engaged in manufacturing of leather products and its income was from the said business. The Assessing Officer based on an information received from the investigation wing that Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh and his group concerns were indulged in providing accommodation entries through his three concerns and taking note that ... Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating: Thus, 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

M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Ltd., North 24 Pgs vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, all these appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 823/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos. 822 To 826/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2016-17 M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Dcit, Cir-11(1), Ltd. Kolkata Haripada Biswas Sarani, Michael Vs. Nagar, Sahara, North 24 Pgs. – 700133. Pan: Aabcb 1409 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Respondent By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dt. 14/06/2023 For Assessment Year 2012- 13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively. Since The Facts & Issues Are Identical & Similar In Nature, Therefore Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Taken As The Lead Case & The Result Of The Same Shall Be Followed For Subsequent Assessment Years I.E., 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 147

engaged in manufacturing of leather products and its income was from the said business. The Assessing Officer based on an information received from the investigation wing that Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh and his group concerns were indulged in providing accommodation entries through his three concerns and taking note that ... Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating: Thus, 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

M/S. Boscon Leather Products (P) Ltd., North 24Pgs vs. DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata.

In the result, all these appeals raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 822/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleita Nos. 822 To 826/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 To 2016-17 M/S. Boscon Leather Products Pvt. Dcit, Cir-11(1), Ltd. Kolkata Haripada Biswas Sarani, Michael Vs. Nagar, Sahara, North 24 Pgs. – 700133. Pan: Aabcb 1409 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Respondent By : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dt. 14/06/2023 For Assessment Year 2012- 13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively. Since The Facts & Issues Are Identical & Similar In Nature, Therefore Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Taken As The Lead Case & The Result Of The Same Shall Be Followed For Subsequent Assessment Years I.E., 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 147

engaged in manufacturing of leather products and its income was from the said business. The Assessing Officer based on an information received from the investigation wing that Shri Sanjiw Kumar Singh and his group concerns were indulged in providing accommodation entries through his three concerns and taking note that ... Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee stating: Thus, 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