← 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

Maanya Goyal, Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad, Gzbd

ITA 1536/DEL/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar

rather ignored this important piece of 23 ITA.Nos.1533 to 1536/Del./2021 ITA Nos. 1807 & 1808/Del./2021 evidence gathered by the Directorate of Investigation Wing. We are not in agreement with the contention of the Ld. CIT DR that the A.O. cannot referred the DVO report suo motto ... that the Ld. CIT(A) has properly considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case including valuation report called by the Directorate of Investigation Wing and thereafter restricted the addition to Rs. 9.02 lac taking the difference between the value shown by the assessee and his co-purchaser

Bankey Behari Goyal, Agra (U.P) vs. DCIT, Central Circle Ghaziabad, Uttarpradesh

ITA 1535/DEL/2021[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar

rather ignored this important piece of 23 ITA.Nos.1533 to 1536/Del./2021 ITA Nos. 1807 & 1808/Del./2021 evidence gathered by the Directorate of Investigation Wing. We are not in agreement with the contention of the Ld. CIT DR that the A.O. cannot referred the DVO report suo motto ... that the Ld. CIT(A) has properly considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case including valuation report called by the Directorate of Investigation Wing and thereafter restricted the addition to Rs. 9.02 lac taking the difference between the value shown by the assessee and his co-purchaser

Yugank Goyal, Agra vs. DCIT, CC, Ghaziabad

ITA 1534/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar

rather ignored this important piece of 23 ITA.Nos.1533 to 1536/Del./2021 ITA Nos. 1807 & 1808/Del./2021 evidence gathered by the Directorate of Investigation Wing. We are not in agreement with the contention of the Ld. CIT DR that the A.O. cannot referred the DVO report suo motto ... that the Ld. CIT(A) has properly considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case including valuation report called by the Directorate of Investigation Wing and thereafter restricted the addition to Rs. 9.02 lac taking the difference between the value shown by the assessee and his co-purchaser

Ani Bala Goyal, Agra vs. DCIT, CC, Ghaizabad

ITA 1533/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyaassessment Year: 2018-19 Anil Bala Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Aappb5034N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Maanya Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Blxps7985K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Yugank Goyal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 6/204, Tikonia, Tax, Central Circle, Belanganj, Agra 282004 Vs. Ghaziabad 201002 Pan Ahhpg4073H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar

rather ignored this important piece of 23 ITA.Nos.1533 to 1536/Del./2021 ITA Nos. 1807 & 1808/Del./2021 evidence gathered by the Directorate of Investigation Wing. We are not in agreement with the contention of the Ld. CIT DR that the A.O. cannot referred the DVO report suo motto ... that the Ld. CIT(A) has properly considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case including valuation report called by the Directorate of Investigation Wing and thereafter restricted the addition to Rs. 9.02 lac taking the difference between the value shown by the assessee and his co-purchaser

Delco Technosoft P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 6646/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, Advocate and Shri V. Rajakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Shah Singh, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

assessee company but the Ld. AO did not make any independent inquiry and made addition solely on the basis of report of the Investigation wing of the Department. The Ld. AR further contended that written submission along with Paper Book containing 41 pages were filed before

ITO, Ward-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Mrg Securities Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 64/KOL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

transfer of funds. These fund transfers had no business rationale or logical explanation. Summon u/s 131 was issued to Shri Ajay Kumar Bajpei by Investigation Wing but it returned unserved. It transpires from the bank account of Shri Ajay Kumar Bajpei and the above mentioned six concerns that funds have ... been debited by RTGS/Trf to various real beneficiaries. CO No. 09/Kol/2022 M R G Securities Pvt. Ltd., AY 2010-11 Inspector was deputed by investigation wing to serve notice to Eastern Financial consultants and Pearl Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. inter alia others. But the inspector failed to locate the officer

Shri Avinash Nivrutti Bhosale, Pune vs. Dy CIT Central Cir-2(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 530/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 132Section 132oSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69C

that the documents found in the search in which abbreviation was used “AB", it was stated to be the name of assessee by the Investigation Wing. However, before Income Tax Settlement Commisison, India Bulls have confirmed that it denotes the Assessee. It clearly denotes that the above abbreviation relates

Shri Avinash Nivrutti Bhosale, Pune vs. Dy CIT Central Cir-2(3, Mumbai

Accordingly, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 132Section 132oSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69C

that the documents found in the search in which abbreviation was used “AB", it was stated to be the name of assessee by the Investigation Wing. However, before Income Tax Settlement Commisison, India Bulls have confirmed that it denotes the Assessee. It clearly denotes that the above abbreviation relates

Gaurav Singhal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-17(4), New Delhi

ITA 576/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Anubhav Sharmagaurav Singhal Vs. Ito, 149, Tarun Enclave, Ward-17(4), Pitampura, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110034 New Delhi-110002 Pan : Aohps3787D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

relevant as in the reasons recorded, it was clearly mentioned that the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis information received from Investigation Wing which includes other brokers also. 2.4 Thus Ld. AO was not satisfied with the submissions of assessee and after discussing the modus operandi ... Investigation Wing’s findings made an addition of Rs. 3,50,280/- considering this amount to be introduced / credited by the assessee in the books of accounts out of these purported share sales receipts. 3 Ld. CIT(A) had sustained addition and assessee is in appeal raising following grounds

Vishal Jain, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 711/HYD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Jan 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Vishal Jain, Vs. The Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle – 3(4), Pan : Aympj0559M. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Ms. Reema Yadav. Date Of Hearing: 17.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.01.2023

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Reema Yadav
Section 115BSection 132ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

explain the sources for the cash, the cash was seized by the Police and later requisitioned u/s. 132A of the IT Act by the Investigation wing on 13.03.2019. Assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) were completed on 22.06.2021 by making addition of Rs. 11,83,000/-and thereby assessing total income

Income Tax Officer (It) -3(1) (1), Mumbai vs. Ronak Iqbal Lakhani, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 835/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.835/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) Ito (It)-3(1)(1) बिधम/ Ronak Iqbal Lakhani Room No. 1630, 16Th Floor, C/O Raju Gilani, 502-504, Vs. Air India Building, Nariman Panju Mahal, Bj Road, Point, Mumbai-400021. Bandra West, Mumbai- 400050. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acdpl8490L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vishal Shah Revenue By: Shri V. Vinod Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-57, Delhi Dated 16.02.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Of Rs.11,59,966/-.

For Appellant: Shri Vishal ShahFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

Gain (LTCG)/loss /Short Term Capital Gain/loss; and since the assessee has traded in the said scrip as per the information received from the investigation wing, the AO re-opened the assessment of the assessee. 4. During the re-assessment proceedings, the assessee brought to the notice

Manish Kumudchandra Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle -19(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2411/MUM/2022[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakashi JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

section 147 of the Act did not agree with the submissions of the assessee and referred to the information received from the Investigation Wing regarding Mr. Rajendra Jain and his group concerns who manage, control and operate numerous concerns in the name of various persons, who were shown as namesake ... during the search and seizure operation conducted on him and his group concerns. Accordingly, based on the findings of the Investigation Wing, the AO, vide assessment order, came to the conclusion that the transaction entered into by the assessee is bogus in nature. Since the loans taken by the assessee

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 388/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 21(5)

express any opinion on the merits". ii.) ln the following cases, it was held that where the A.O. had received information from the Investigation wing, the reopening us.L47 of the Act on the basis of said information was justified. - Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Rakesh

Bikash Deb, Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT Circle- 2(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 357/CTK/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaita Nos.357 & 388/Ctk/2019 /2019 Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010 10 & 2010-11 Bikash Dev Bikash Dev, Flat No.101, Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-2(1), Haraprity Haraprity Apar Apartment, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Vivekananda Vivekananda Marg, Marg, Old Old Town, Bhubaneswar. Town, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Ahepd 0737 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 17/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01 /01/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Bal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 21(5)

express any opinion on the merits". ii.) ln the following cases, it was held that where the A.O. had received information from the Investigation wing, the reopening us.L47 of the Act on the basis of said information was justified. - Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Rakesh

ITO Ward 20(3), New Delhi vs. Pyramid Infracon Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1936/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69

through and it is found that the facts of the present case are different from the case laws relied upon by the appellant. The Investigation Wing has prepared a list of the beneficiaries after carrying out investigations from the material gathered as a result of action. On the basis ... such investigation, the list of entities controlled and managed by Shri R. C. Gupta along with the beneficiaries has been prepared by the Investigation Wing and has been made available to the AO for necessary action. Out of these entities, one specific entity has been found with which the appellant

Bharat Pradhan, Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Darjeeling

ITA 87/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 87/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Bharat Pradhan, ...................................Appellant Chandra Bhawan, Bloomfield Cess Road, Dali, Darjeeling-734101, West Bengal [Pan: Aenpp6778B] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,..............................Respondent Ward-3(3), Darjeeling, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & Dist. Darjeeling, Pin-734101 Appearances By: Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16, 2023 O R D E R

Section 50C(2)

appellate order. (4) That the Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred in not considering that the Ld. A.O. in total disregard of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department deciding the sale consideration of the land at 25% of Rs 2.56 crores and hence the addition sustained at Rs.62

Shri Ravi Prakash Langer Prop M/S Langer Auto Sales & Sevices, Ujjain vs. ACIT 2 (1), Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 106/IND/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Apurva Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 54B

erred in confirming the same without appreciating that the assessment has been reopened merely on the basis of information received from the investigation wing and without application of mind and doing so is wrong and contrary to the facts of the case and provisions of the Act and the reassessment ... submitted that the assessment was reopened without any fresh tangible material. The assessment has been reopened nearly on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing and there was no tangible material taken into account by the Assessing Officer. 6. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the draft reasons

Farha S. Kadri, Bilimora vs. ITO, Ward-2, Navsari

In the result, the original ground No

ITA 331/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Farha S Kadri, I.T.O. 762, Bazar Street, Bunder Road, Ward-2, Vs. Bilimora (Gujarat)-396321 Navsari. Pan No. Annpk 8150 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

basis of borrowed satisfaction. It is an admitted fact that the ITA 331/Srt/2019 Farha S Kadri Vs ITO information was received from Investigation Wing, therefore, cannot be any reassessment proceedings on such information. On receipt of information or material, the Assessing Officer was required to apply his mind on such

Kishin Ramchandra Balani, Mumbai vs. ITO 22 (2) (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1805/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1805/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2010-11) Kishin Ramchand Balani बिधम/ Ito-22(2)(1) Kishin Ramchandra Balani Mumbai. Vs. 201 La Vie, 14Th Road, Khar West, Mumbai- 400052. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahdpb0362N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri N. M. Porwal Revenue By: Smt. Nayana K. Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 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 16.06.2022 For Ay. 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Challenged The Validity Of The Reopening By Ao (Jurisdiction) U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”). So The Legal Issue Is Taken Up First.

For Appellant: Shri N. M. PorwalFor Respondent: Smt. Nayana K. Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Rs.82,71,795/- and M/s. Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd. to the tune of Rs.7,44,192/-. So the information which AO has received from investigation wing, according to Ld. AR itself does not match/tally. And the Ld. AR wondered as to how the adverse information which was based

Srichand Chaturmal HUF, Mumbai vs. The ACIT 17(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2334/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2334/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Srichand Chatrumal Huf बिधम/ Acit-17(2) 5-B, Elegant Apartment, 3 Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Sobhani Road, Colaba, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Mumbai-400005. 400051. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaahs9693F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6537/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Mrs. Rashmi Sukesh Malik Ito, Ward-16(1)(2) बिधम/ Alias Of Jyoti Srichand Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Bathija Mumbai-400020. 5B, Elegant Apartment, 3, Sobhani Road, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai- 400005. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapb6002D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Hari Raheja Revenue By: Ms. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/12/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee’S Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 25.10.2021 For The Assessment Year 2014-15; & That Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-04, Mumbai Dated 25.09.2018 For Ay. 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Hari RahejaFor Respondent: Ms. Nayana K. Kumar (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 148

payment through banking channels along with bank statements etc. It is noted that the authorities below have relied merely on the report of investigation wing and interim-report of SEBI by ignoring the relevant facts on record. In this case, it is a matter of record that when called upon ... KAFL is not existing as per the final order of the SEBI (supra). 15. The AO has also relied on the report of the investigation wing and/or the statement of the several third party/persons recorded by the investigation wing in connection with the alleged bogus transaction in the shares