“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

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

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

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

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

Anil Kumar Bhalla, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 61(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed, as indicated

ITA 732/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 147Section 68

reopening of the assessment are filed at page-13 of the PB in which the A.O. has recorded that as per information received from Investigation Wing search was carried-out on 27.06.2013 in Santosh Medical College Group of Institutions and Dr. P. Maha Lingam, who was Chairman/Director of this Institution ... appellate order, in which, in Ground No.6, assessee has challenged the addition of Rs.19,75,000/-. He has submitted that A.O. or the Investigation Wing have not supplied copy of the statement of Dr P Mahalingam to him for rebutting his statement and no cross-examination to his statement have

Anil Kumar Bhalla, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 61(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed, as indicated

ITA 1366/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 147Section 68

ITO Ward-1(1), New Delhi vs. Asm Pipes Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 9898/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 9898/Del/2019 (A.Y 2011-12) Income Tax Officer, M/S. Asm Pipes Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Plot No. 67, Road No. 41, Ward : 1 (1), West Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. West Delhi – 110 026. Pan No. Aagca0304C

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

established that the assessee was used for benefit of SMC group/Signature builder group of Companies and in the appraisal report, the Investigation Wing, New Delhi had held that during the year under consideration the assessee company had earned undisclosed income in the garb of forfeiture of share application money amounting

Ramesh J. Thakkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 26(3)(6), Mumbai

In the result Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 823/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 823/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Income Tax Officer Ramesh J. Thakkar 26(3)(6) Mumbai 51, Moti Sagar,3Rd Road बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Floor, Ganesh Gawde Road, Vs. Road, Church Gate, Mulund(W), Mumbai- Mumbai-400020 400080 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabpt4367L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri. Mehul Shah प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.03.2021, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 147/143(3), For The Ay 2012-13. 2

For Appellant: Shri. Mehul ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Neeta Jeph

Section 132(4)Section 147Section 68

order to provide bogus entries of Long term capital gain, short term capital loss and business loss. As per the information received from the investigation wing, the assessee had earned Long Term Capital Gain through the transaction in penny scrip of M/s. Divine Multimedia (India) Ltd. and claimed exemption

Bhavesh Arunkumar Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 757/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleshri Bhavesh Arunkumar Shah V. Acit – 19(1) G-7, Sarvodaya Nagar Matru Mandir 1St Panjrapole Lane Mumbai – 400 007 C.P. Tank, Mumbai - 400004 Pan: Andps5035M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Suchek Anchalia Department Represented By : Shri Chetan M. Kacha

Section 143(2)Section 35(1)(ii)

proceeded to deny the benefit observing that the explanation offered by the assesse has been carefully considered and taking into consideration finding of the investigation wing, the genuineness of the trust is not proved. Further, all the receipt is in serial order though the cheques has been issued on different

Dy.CIT Central Cir-2(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Kumar Rasiklal Mehta, Mumbai

ITA 442/MUM/2022[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 1997-98 Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Kumar Rasiklal Income Tax, Mehta, Central Circle – 2(1), 602-603, Prasad Old Cgo Building, 804, Vs. Chambers, 8Th Floor, Opera House, Cit 2(1)(2), Mumbai – 400 004 M.K. Road, Pan: Aaopm3805D Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Kapadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Nikalje, D.R

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 69A

HSBC Bank, Geneva and amount of balance in the particular years as mentioned in the document. At the time of investigation by the Investigation wing of Income Tax Department, Mumbai and during recording of statement under section 131 of the Act the assessee denied having any such account maintained with

Dy.C.I.T. Cent. Cir-6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Dilip B.Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objections for AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14

ITA 2349/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

that the ‘information’ referred to by the Ld. CIT(A) was the inputs received by the Investigating authorities from the SEBI and other Investigation Wings of the Department. The AO has noted at Para 4.3 of the impugned order that the SEBI had passed an interim order dated ... Investigating Officer were general in nature and there was no reference to any ‘information’ gathered from SEBI or any other Department of Investigation Wing. In fact, it is noted by us, that like Dhenu Buildcon Ltd, similar questions at Q Nos. 48 & 58 were put to the assessee regarding

Vivek Jajoo, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-26(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4350/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Alok Periwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151

Income Tax Officer in mechanical reopening of the Assessment without having belief that the income had escaped Assessment as the information received from the Investigation Wing of the department was mechanically reproduced in reasons for reopening the assessment, is unjust, illegal, arbitrary and against the facts and circumstances ... read with section 151 of the Income Tax Act. The proceedings u/s 147 have been started on the basis of information received from the investigation wing of the Department regarding inquires conducted in the case of client code modification transaction wherein brokers were indulged in transferring the fictitious losses

Jayesh Sunilkumar Bhandari, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1 (1), Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 284/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.284/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jayesh Sunilkumar Bhandari, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Nashik. Shop No.5 & 6 Pushpum, Plaza Jijamata Road, Saraf Bazar, Near Dhahi Pool, Nashik- 422001. Pan : Anzpb5202D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28.11.2022 : आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nashik [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 10.12.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is An Individual Deriving Income From The Business Of Dealing In Gold. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Was Filed On 30.11.2014 Disclosing Total Income Of Rs.13,78,310/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Income

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 5

shares of M/s. Kelvin Fincap Ltd. and subsequent sale is nothing but a bogus transaction by relying upon the investigation report by the Investigation Wing of the Department and the Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI). The Assessing Officer had also analyzed the modus operandi adopted by the appellant ... sake of brevity, the modus operandi is not discussed herein. The appellant was also provided the copy of statements recorded by the Investigation Wing of the Department, Calcutta from Shri Devesh Upadhyaya and Shri Akash Agrawal who are directors of the Mishka Finance and Trading Ltd. alleged to be involved

A J Mill Store Agency Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 552/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131oSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessment order has been perused and it is seen that the reason for reopening is on the basis of information received from the Investigation wing, Kolkata as per which the appellant has been mentioned by name as being a beneficiary of accommodation entries and in receipt of huge amounts ... view of the fact, that the case of the appellant was reopened in March 2019 on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing, Kolkata that the assessee company was a beneficiary of accommodation entries provided by the bank account of paper/ shell companies for layering funds. The appellant

A J Mill Store Agency Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 551/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 131oSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Sri Deepak Agarwal, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward - 23(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2177/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 68

evidences were filed to prove the genuineness of the transactions and the addition made simply on suspicion on the basis of information from the Investigation Wing is unjustified and not in accordance with law. 4. For that the Ld. C.I.T(A) erred in confirming the addition u/s. 68 when

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle3-(1), Hyderabad vs. M/S. Musaddilal Gems and Jewels Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

ITA 59/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy

Section 131Section 68

search and survey action u/s 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee on 01.12.2016 by the Investigating Wing, Hyderabad. During the survey, it was noticed that assessee had deposited Rs.39,64,98,000/- in its Axis Bank account and Rs.50 ... Tharad and accordingly they entered the advance cash receipts in their books against 2153 customers. Having accepted (even other-wise proved later by the Investigation Wing that the list of customers is a fabricated one) that the list is a bogus one,, the assessee cannot 'Claim that cash advances were

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle3-(1), Hyderabad vs. Vaishnavi Bullion Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

ITA 58/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy

Section 131Section 68

Vaishnavi Bullion Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

ITA 561/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy

Section 131Section 68

Musaddilal Gems Jewels Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, we uphold the addition of Rs

ITA 560/HYD/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Bhaskar Reddy

Section 131Section 68

Sangeeta Nawal Agarwal, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

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

ITA 1806/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: The Tribunal.

Section 68

earned long term capital gains on sale of M/s Global Infratech & Finance Ltd, which was identified as one of the penny stocks by the investigation wing of the department. This company was earlier known as M/s. Asianlak Capital & Finance Ltd. Hence the AO took the view that the assessee ... transactions of purchase and sale of shares. He submitted that the AO has simply placed his reliance on the report given by the investigation wing of the department. The AO has also not shown that the assessee was part of the ring which alleged to have rigged the prices

ITO 13(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S.Vedartha Entertainment Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4233/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Section 133(6)Section 3Section 68

action was taken and it was admitted by them that they were providing only accommodation entries by way of bogus unsecured loans etc. The investigation wing had given detailed report on the modus operandi adopted by Bhanwarlal Jain group and the assessing officer has extracted the same in the assessment ... Ahiman Gems P Ltd responded to the notices and furnished the relevant details called for by the AO. Since the investigation wing had taken the view that these companies are bogus companies, the AO also held that these two companies are bogus companies. 5. The assessee submitted that Shri Bhanwarlal

Manoj Kumar Sharma, Jaipur vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 283/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 263

income at Rs. 71,22,29,910/- and agriculture income of Rs. 3,22,500/-. Search and seizure proceeding were carried out by the Investigation Wing of the department at the residential and business premises connected with “Resonance Group, Kota” on 07.08.2017, u/s 132 of the Income

Manoj Kumar Sharma, Jaipur vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 282/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 263