“investigation wing”

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

further an admitted fact on record that the assessee, by way of a detailed communication dated 03 January 2019, addressed to the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, retracted the statements recorded during the course of search. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically stated that the statements were not based ... assessee, as noted earlier, retracted the statements recorded during the course of search by filing a detailed letter dated 03 January 2019 before the Investigation Wing, Mumbai. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically his premises and were obtained under mental pressure. 24.1. The assessee further stated that the questions

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

further an admitted fact on record that the\nassessee, by way of a detailed communication dated 03\nJanuary 2019, addressed to the Investigation Wing,\nMumbai, retracted the statements recorded during the course of\nsearch. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically\nstated that the statements were not based ... assessee, as noted earlier, retracted the statements\nrecorded during the course of search by filing a detailed letter\ndated 03 January 2019 before the Investigation Wing,\nMumbai. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically\nstated that the statements recorded during the course of\nsearch were not based on any incriminating

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

further an admitted fact on record that the assessee, by way of a detailed communication dated 03 January 2019, addressed to the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, retracted the statements recorded during the course of search. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically stated that the statements were not based ... assessee, as noted earlier, retracted the statements recorded during the course of search by filing a detailed letter dated 03 January 2019 before the Investigation Wing, Mumbai. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically stated that the statements recorded during the course of search were not based on any incriminating

Deepak Kakubhai Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle - 4(1), Mumbai

further an admitted fact on record that the assessee, by way of a detailed communication dated 03 January 2019, addressed to the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, retracted the statements recorded during the course of search. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically stated that the statements were not based ... assessee, as noted earlier, retracted the statements recorded during the course of search by filing a detailed letter dated 03 January 2019 before the Investigation Wing, Mumbai. In the said retraction, the assessee categorically stated that the statements recorded during the course of search were not based on any incriminating

Shah Petroleum Products, Chembur vs. ACIT, Circle 27(3), Mumbai, Vashi

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2012-13 Shah Petroleum Products, Acit, Circle 27(3), Bpcl Petrol Pump, Opp. Room No. 423, 4Th Floor, Shoppers Stop, Ghatkopar Vs. Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Mahul Road, Chembur, Mumbai, Station Commercial Mumbai – 400089. Complex, Vashi, Pan – Aabfs2738Q Navi Mumbai – 400703. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 06.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2026 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.06.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In This Case, The Ao Had Received The Information Dated 19.03.2019 From The Ddit (Inv.) Unit – 5(4), Mumbai To The Effect That In A Survey Action Under Section 132 Of The Act Carried Out In The Case Of M/S. Evergreen Enterprise, Statement Of Mr. Nilesh Bharani, Being Partner Of Such Enterprises Recorded Under Section 132 (4) Of The Act, Wherefrom Undisclosed Activity Of Money 2 Shah Petroleum Products

ledger were duly admitted and revealed during the course of statement of Mr. Nilesh Bharani and employees of M/s. Evergreen Enterprise recorded by the investigation wing at the time of such proceedings. 6. The AO ultimately made the addition of Rs.46,00,000/- more or less, on the basis ... which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 15/04/2013. 3. Subsequently, on the information received from the DDIT-Tax Investigation Wing 5(4), Mumbai to the effect that findings arose from search action under section 132 of the Act carried out in the case of M/s Evergreen

Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 33(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on merits

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarito Ward-32(2)(1) Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt Kautilya Bhavan, I-1434, Govardhan Nagar Bandra Kurla Bldg. No. 4, Opp. Poinsur Vs. Complex, Bandra (E), Gymkhana, Kandivali Mumbai-400 051 (West), Mumbai-400 067 Pan/Gir No. Aiypb4411G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ketan L. Vajani, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Aditya Rai, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.01.2026

validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act, contending that the reopening was based on borrowed satisfaction from the Investigation Wing and in the absence of any income escaping assessment.The addition 4 Jigna Ashutosh Bhatt of Rs. 39,00,000/- made under section ... that the original return was processed under section 143(1) and the Assessing Officer was in possession of fresh tangible material received from the Investigation Wing. The CIT(A) observed that at the stage of reopening, the Assessing Officer was only required to form a prima facie “reason to believe

Vikas Motiram Desai, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(3)(5), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

discrepancy in the loan amount as 4 Vikas Motiram Desai, Mumbai. per Annexure A-2 (at Rs.2.23 cr.) and the information received from Investigation Wing (at Rs. 3.92 cr.). The A0 was also asked to furnish copier of the relevant seized documents on the basis of which additions were made ... office have not received any seized material pertain to M/s. Evergreen Enterprises. However, the statement of Mr. Nilesh Bharani recorded on 11.10.2017 by the Investigation Wing is available with this office and same is annexed with this letter for your good self ready reference. 8. Further, copy of the cross

Santosh Laujari Gupta, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer - 33(3)(3), Kautilya Bhavan

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

proprietorship concern in the name of M/s. Meltstar Metals trading in iron and steel. During the year under consideration, AO received information from DGIT investigation wing Mumbai to the effect that assessee was involved in taking accommodation entries from Hawala dealers identified by Maharashtra sales tax department. 4. Since

Surendra Garg HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), Mumbai

assessment years was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, on the basis of information received from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation Wing), Ahmadabad to the effect that M/s. KGN Group of Companies were engaged in providing bogus Long Term Capital Gain entries in respect ... Assessee. According to the Revenue reassessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of information received from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation Wing), Ahmadabad to the effect that KGN Group of Companies was engaged in providing bogus Long Term Capital Gain accommodation entries and that during relevant previous year

Surendra Garg HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), Mumbai

assessment years was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, on the basis of information received from Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Investigation Wing), Ahmadabad to the effect that M/s. KGN Group of Companies were engaged in providing bogus Long Term Capital Gain entries in respect

Progressive Surface Systems Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 13(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Bijayananda Prusethprogressive Surface Vs. Circle 13(1)(2) Systems Private Limited Aayakar Bhawan, Maharishi Karve Road, 3-B, Udyog Nagar, S.V. Churchgate, Road, Malad West, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400064. Pan/Gir No: Aaccp9075D (Appellant) (Respondent)

replied to the show cause notice explaining the transactions of purchases with corroborative evidences, and the Assessing Officer simply relied on the report of Investigation Wing rather than making independent inquiry in the matter rendering proceedings under section 147 invalid in as much as illegal. 3. Your Appellant craves leave

Pravin Mohanlal Selvadia, Mumbai vs. CIT (A), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

without appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer has discussed in details in the assessment order about the modus operandi unearthed by the Investigation Wing which clearly established that such bogus transactions of penny stock of M/s. Thyrocare Pvt Ltd were pre- Arranged by Operator of Exit Provider who Charge ... beneficiaries into legitimate income under the garb of exempt LTCG without appreciating the fact that AO has relied upon the report of investigation wing wherein, it is stated that during the course of search/survey action, it was admitted by the exit/entry provider that commission in cash was charged for providing

ACIT, Mumbai vs. Pravin Selvadia, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

without appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer has discussed in details in the assessment order about the modus operandi unearthed by the Investigation Wing which clearly established that such bogus transactions of penny stock of M/s. Thyrocare Pvt Ltd were pre- Arranged by Operator of Exit Provider who Charge ... beneficiaries into legitimate income under the garb of exempt LTCG without appreciating the fact that AO has relied upon the report of investigation wing wherein, it is stated that during the course of search/survey action, it was admitted by the exit/entry provider that commission in cash was charged for providing