← 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

DCIT- Circle- 1, Thane vs. Darshan Enterprises, Thane

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 463/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

For Appellant: Shri Shashi TulsianFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI

DCIT- Circle- 1, Thane vs. Darshan Enterprises, Thane

In the result, the both appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 462/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. No.462 /Mum/2019 & I.T.A.No.463/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Darshan Enterprises Circle-1,6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, 2Nd Floor, Rosa Vista, Vs. B Wing Wagle Industrial Estate Ghodbunder Road, Thane- 400604 Opp. Suraj Water Park, Thane(West) 400615 स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfd8612N (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Shashi Tulsian Revenue By: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26/10/2022 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Revenue Against The Action Of The Ld.Cit(A)-Nashik Dated 5-11-2018 For Ay 2010-11. [One I.E. Ita 462 Is Against The Quantum Deleted By Ld.Cit(A) & Ita 463 Is Against The Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter “The Act”) Deleted By Ld.Cit(A)]. 2. First Of All We Will Take Up The Quantum Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Wherein The Revenue Challenges The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Deleted The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As Ao) Under Section 68 Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Partnership Firm Had Filed Return Of Income On 22.09.2010 Declaring Income Of Rs. Rs. 1,47,73,191/-. Later The Case For The Relevant Assessment Year Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Ao Noted That

For Appellant: Shri Shashi TulsianFor Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

ITA. 462& 463/MUM/2019 AY 2010-11 M/s Darshan Enterprises IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI

Mrs.Rashmi Sukesh Malik Alias of Jyoti Srichand Bathija, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 16(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6537/MUM/2018[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

Jagdamba Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward _ 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 432/KOL/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.431 & 432/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jagdamba Ispat Pvt. Ltd…………………...........................………...…..…Appellant Room No.A, 1St Floor, 1C, Jorabagan Street, M.D. Road, Kolkata-700006. [Pan: Aabcj4827C] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(3) , Kolkata…….. …..…...................................…....…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Fca & Amit Agrawal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 10, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Two Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 31.05.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Ita No.431/Kol/2022 Is Against The Confirmations Of Quantum Additions Made By The Assessing Officer, Whereas, The Ita No.432/Kol/2022 Is Against The Confirmation Of Penalty Levied U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Which In Consequential Of The Aforesaid Quantum Addition Made By The Assessing Officer & Confirmed By The Cit(A). We, Therefore, Firstly Take Up The Assessee’S Appeal Relating To The Quantum Additions.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

case, there was no independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer just relied upon the factually incorrect report of the investigation wing and thereby proceeded to reopen the assessment without comparing and verifying the said report with the assessment records. Even the assessee also filed reply

Jagdamba Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 3(3), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 431/KOL/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A Nos.431 & 432/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jagdamba Ispat Pvt. Ltd…………………...........................………...…..…Appellant Room No.A, 1St Floor, 1C, Jorabagan Street, M.D. Road, Kolkata-700006. [Pan: Aabcj4827C] Vs. Ito, Ward-3(3) , Kolkata…….. …..…...................................…....…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Fca & Amit Agrawal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 29, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 10, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Two Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Both Dated 31.05.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). Ita No.431/Kol/2022 Is Against The Confirmations Of Quantum Additions Made By The Assessing Officer, Whereas, The Ita No.432/Kol/2022 Is Against The Confirmation Of Penalty Levied U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act Which In Consequential Of The Aforesaid Quantum Addition Made By The Assessing Officer & Confirmed By The Cit(A). We, Therefore, Firstly Take Up The Assessee’S Appeal Relating To The Quantum Additions.

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

case, there was no independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer just relied upon the factually incorrect report of the investigation wing and thereby proceeded to reopen the assessment without comparing and verifying the said report with the assessment records. Even the assessee also filed reply

Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(3)(6), Surat vs. Shri Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, Surat

In the result the ground No

ITA 38/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 21/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Surat. Jin Shanti Building, Jada Khadi, Mahidharpura – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.38/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2012-13) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(6), Vs. Abhishek Navnitkumar Doshi, 204/205, 2Nd Floor, 6/1911-12, Surat. Jin Shanti Building, Jada Khadi, Mahidharpura – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhpd0064M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28/12/2022 09/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148

search and seizure action u/s 132 of the IT. Act in the case of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain & others was carried out by the Investigation Wing of Income tax Department, Mumbai on 03.10.2013 From various incriminating documentary evidences collected and the statement recorded of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain, during the course ... various documentary evidences furnished by assessee. The ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue supported the order of AO. The ld. CIT-DR submits that Investigation Wing, Mumbai made a search on Bhanwarlal Jain Group. During the search and after search, the Investigation Wing made a thorough investigation and concluded that