← 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

Mahesh Kumar Gupta, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 149/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rajeev Sogani (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

these were earlier produced before Investigation Wingh in F.Y. 2016-17 i.e. after the sales were made and same were verified by the Investigation Wing also. This view of the ld. CIT(A) indicates hat the assessee has maintained regular books of accounts, bills, vouchers and day to day stock

Deepak Jain, C-Scheme vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Bhagwan Das Road

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 196/JPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 44ASection 68

person associated with DRPL, against assessee. 1.5. Ld. AO did not mitigate the risk of any lapse/disconnect in the information provided/compiled by the Investigation Wing. 1.6. It is a settled principle, even expounded by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Common causes v. UOI (Sahara Diaries case ... Jain, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Jaipur expected to arrive at a subjective satisfaction, independently based on objective criteria. 1.8. Information from the Investigation Wing, might constitute part of the material to investigate further, however, the process of arriving at such satisfaction cannot merely be such information. Recording

Shri Vinod Bansal, Chennai vs. Aci-Cent. Circle-3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 445/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

supra), where the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered an identical issue on bogus long term capital gains, in light of report of investigation wing and after considering relevant facts, the Hon’ble High Court clearly held that the AO cannot come to the conclusion on the basis ... report of investigation wing that transactions of the assessee are bogus in nature, unless he conducts necessary enquiries to ascertain correct facts with regard to nature of transactions. The relevant findings of the Delhi High Court are as under: “It is argued by the Revenue that the ITAT should have

Smt. Bimala Devi Agarwal, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle3(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 422/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 422/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

supra), where the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered an identical issue on bogus long term capital gains, in light of report of investigation wing and after considering relevant facts, the Hon’ble High Court clearly held that the AO cannot come to the conclusion on the basis ... report of investigation wing that transactions of the assessee are bogus in nature, unless he conducts necessary enquiries to ascertain correct facts with regard to nature of transactions. The relevant findings of the Delhi High Court are as under: “It is argued by the Revenue that the ITAT should have

Smt. Shoba Agarwal, Chennai vs. ACIT Cent Circle 3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 421/CHNY/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 421/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri. R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 263

supra), where the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has considered an identical issue on bogus long term capital gains, in light of report of investigation wing and after considering relevant facts, the Hon’ble High Court clearly held that the AO cannot come to the conclusion on the basis ... report of investigation wing that transactions of the assessee are bogus in nature, unless he conducts necessary enquiries to ascertain correct facts with regard to nature of transactions. The relevant findings of the Delhi High Court are as under: “It is argued by the Revenue that the ITAT should have

DCIT, Central Circle-26, New Delhi vs. Kds Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 38/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhrydcit Vs. M/S. Kds Corporation Pvt. Central Circle – 26 Ltd., Building No.23, New Delhi -110 055 Nehru Place South Delhi Delhi – 110 019 Pan No. Aacck 4674 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By -None- Revenue By Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.10.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153A

noted that a search and survey operation u/s 132/133A of the Act was conducted by the DCIT vs. KDS Corporation Pvt. Ltd. 2 Investigation Wing of the Department on 20.06.2014 in M/s. Alchemist Group of cases. The office premise of the assessee was also covered

The Dy. Commissioner Income-Tax, Jammu vs. M/S. Horizon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd, Jammu

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 673/ASR/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DRFor Respondent: S/Sh. P.N. Arora, Adv., Pradeep
Section 69

sale received by the assessee was more than what it was shown in the deed of registration on the basis of report of investigation wing of the department based on a photocopy of an agreement y the assessee. No evidence on record to show that assessee had received more than

The Dy. Commissioner Income-Tax, Jammu vs. M/S. Horizon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd, Jammu

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 672/ASR/2014[201-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DRFor Respondent: S/Sh. P.N. Arora, Adv., Pradeep
Section 69

sale received by the assessee was more than what it was shown in the deed of registration on the basis of report of investigation wing of the department based on a photocopy of an agreement y the assessee. No evidence on record to show that assessee had received more than

The Dy. Commissioner Income-Tax, Jammu vs. M/S. Horizon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd, Jammu

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in I

ITA 671/ASR/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DRFor Respondent: S/Sh. P.N. Arora, Adv., Pradeep
Section 69

sale received by the assessee was more than what it was shown in the deed of registration on the basis of report of investigation wing of the department based on a photocopy of an agreement y the assessee. No evidence on record to show that assessee had received more than

Designer Exim Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, 1(1)(2), Surat

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 14/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) M/S Designer Exim Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O., D-1203, Panchsheel Heights, Opp.- Ward 1(1)(2), Vs. Pizza Hut, Mahavir Nagar, Kandivali Surat. West, Mumbai, Maharashtra-400067 Pan No. Aabcd 4298 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 254(1)

income of Rs. 1,86,240/- for A.Y. 2012-13. Subsequently, the case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing on 22/03/2019 wherein it was revealed that a bank account in Axis bank in the name of Shrikant Deven Patel, proprietor of Sonali Enterprises

Mr. Ramanlal Raghabhi Patel, Daman vs. The PCIT, Valsad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 105/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.105/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Ramanlal Raghabhai Patel, Vs. The Pcit, Valsad. Near Check Post, Dabhel, Daman – 396210, Daman & Diu (Ut). (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Accpp2952J

Section 143(3)Section 263

information available makes the order erroneous and also prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The Assessing Officer has mentioned about inputs from investigation wing in assessment order but has not examined absolutely anything regarding the genuinity of the transactions. The Ld. PCIT had enough material in his custody

Hotel Royal Garden, Daman and Diu (Ut) vs. The PCIT, Valsad

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is dismissed

ITA 103/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) Hotel Royal Garden, Vs. The Pcit, Valsad. Main Road, Dabhel, Nani Daman – 396210, Daman & Diu (Ut). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefh2587H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Darshit J. Naik, Ca With Jayraj M. Naik, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 05/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21/03/2023

Section 143(3)Section 263

information available makes the order erroneous and also prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The Assessing Officer has mentioned about inputs from investigation wing in assessment order but has not examined absolutely anything regarding the genuinity of the transactions. The Ld. PCIT had enough material in his custody

Shri Anand M Gupta, Lucknow vs. ITO - 15(1)(4), Mumbai

ITA 2948/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleestate Of Shri Anand M. Gupta V. Income Tax Officer – 15(1)(4) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road {Through Legal Heir Mumbai - 400020 Mrs. Madhu Anand Gupta} B-723, Sector – C Mahanagar, Lucknow – 226006 Uttar Pradesh Pan: Aabae8078Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Malav Sheth Shri Ashish Kumar Department Represented By :

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69

long term capital gain was found to be suspicious 3 Estate of Shri Anand M. Gupta and detailed investigation was undertaken by the Kolkata Investigation wing into 84 Penny Stocks (Trinity Tradelink Ltd., {in short “TTL”}) and has given detailed findings indicating bogus LTCG/STCG entries claimed by large number

Gcb Securities P Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward -11(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1566/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O.P.Kant[Assessment Year : 2009-10] M/S. Gcb Securities P.Ltd., Vs Ito, Office No.474-475, Aggarwal Ward-10(1), Millennium Tower-2, Netaji Subhash [Previous Ward- Palace, Pitampura, New Delhi-110034. 11(2)], New Delhi. Pan-Aaccg4729R Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Anuj Garg, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 16.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.03.2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

below and submitted that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the transaction related to acquisition of shares. He submitted that Investigation Wing found that these entities were part of bogus companies floated by Shri S.K. Jain. These companies were not doing actual business but were engaged

Shri Fateh Chand Chindalia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 40(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 185/KOL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.185/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Fateh Chand Chindalia........................................………...…..…Appellant 4A, Sayed Sally Street, Kolkata-700073. [Pan: Adfpc9919G] Vs. Ito, Ward-40(1), Kolkata......................................................…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 24, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 16, 2023 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 19.03.2021 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax -1, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Pcit’] Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. For That The Ld. Pcit Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 When The Assessment Completed U/S 143(3)/147 On 26.12.2018 Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

vide order dated 26.02.2014. Thereafter, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 read with section 148 of the Act on the report of the investigation wing that the assessee has made investment in penny stock shares of Global Capital Markets Ltd. on 18.11.2010 for a total consideration amounting to Rs.7

DCIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1179/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usasstt. Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd, Central Circle-15, B-393, Zakir Nagar So, South East New Delhi Delhi, New Delhi-1100025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 68

parties and the parties and the genuineness of the transactions in respect of heavy investment in shares and premium. The fact is, as even investigation Wing has already established in various cases of accommodation entries, it is evident process of layering and trailing of funds come to in the accounts ... upto the mark to fit with the investment made in shares of the appellant company by these entities. • The fact is, as even Investigation Wing has already established in various cases of accommodation entries, it is evident process of layering and trailing of funds come to in the accounts above

DCIT, CC-15, New Delhi vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1177/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usasstt. Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Bdr Builders & Developers P. Ltd,B- Central Circle-15, 393, Zakir Nagar So, South East Delhi, New Delhi New Delhi-1100025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.03.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 68

which was forwarded to DCCC-15 Delhi. The information in the case of M/s VBPL/RBPL/DSDPL was received by DCCC-15 Delhi directly from the Investigation wing Delhi. The reopening u/s 148, on account of the transactions relating to the merged entities, had been done in the name ... observed from the assessment records that there was communication of the information relating to three transactions from the investigation wing to the AO. The information can be summed up as under: a) The information was received from the Investigation wing Delhi in the office of Range-10, Delhi (earlier jurisdiction

P M Nargunam, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 304/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 304/Del/2020 (A.Y 2014-15) बनाम P M Nargunam, Acit No. 1, Santosh Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-6, Pratap Vihar, New Delhi. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aaepn9976E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 131Section 68

seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act (Act for short) was carried out on Santosh/Km/VMI group and its promoters by the Investigation Wing. The assessee filed return declaring income of Rs.32,25,160/- in compliance with the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. The assessment order came ... same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 19.02.2011. Later on, certain information as mentioned in assessment order was received from Investigation Wing regarding search and survey action of Surender Kumar Jain and his brother Virendra Jain and it was reported by Investigation Wing to the AO that

Diya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated herein above

ITA 1929/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Diya Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 1373, Rani Bagh, Shakur Ward-7(3), Basti, Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Aaccd3991L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Nargas, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

reasons recorded (PB Pg. 9-10) the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) made an allegation on the basis of some report received from the Investigation Wing, that the assessee has received RS.10,00,000/- from M/s. S.R. Cables Pvt. Ltd. which was an accommodation entry. The assessee filed return in pursuance ... reasons recorded placed at PB Pg. 9-10 it can be seen that the Ld. AO has relied upon the report received from the Investigation Wing and there is no independent application of mind of his own. He has merely incorporated the contents of the report of the Investigation Wring

Sadhana Foundation, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed and the addition of Rs

ITA 2129/DEL/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 131

account. 3. The search and seizure operation was carried out on Group USHA of Sh. Vinay Rai on 14.2.2001. Detailed investigation by the Investigation Wing and post search enquiries established the fact of having floated around 250 bogus companies by the group. As many as 9 flagship concerns were identified