“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

Nishith Rameshchandra Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 23(2)(6), Mumbai

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

ITA 1116/MUM/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2022AY 2012-2013

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

record, we are of the considered opinion that the AO has reopened the assessee’s case based on the information received from the investigation wing. It is pertinent to point out that the assessment order in the present case does not have any mention about the independent inquiry that ... direct evidences. But, in the present case we find that the AO has made no enquiry other than relying on the report of the investigation wing and the steep increase in the price of the shares. We are of the considered opinion that the AO should have done a further

DCIT, Circle-23(1), New Delhi vs. Shivram Consultants India P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, cross-objection of the Assessee is 17

ITA 46/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Sabharwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

return of income was initially processed under section 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Subsequently, the A.O. received information from Investigation Wing which are noted by the A.O. in the assessment order, and based on such information and after analysing the return of income for the A.Ys

DCIT, CC-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. P & P Highrise Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 493/KOL/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Swati Bajaj 139 taxmann.com 362 (Cal.), which upheld the additions on the basis of the inquiry/findings of Investigation Wing. (2) That Department carves leave to add, alter or modify any or all grounds of appeal either before or during course of appellate proceedings ... received share capital along, with substantial amount of premium and only for these reasons the assessment proceedings have been reopened. The information received from Investigation Wing does not mention the names of the doubtful creditors or the reasons why the share capital received from such parties are considered

ITO 28 )(2)(3), Navi Mumbai vs. M/S N G Group, Navi Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6748/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am M/S Ng Group Ito, 28(2)(3) Plot No.8, Sector 11, Opp R. No. 310, 3 Rd Floor, Juinagar Rly Station, Vashi Rly Station Complex, Vs. Vashi Navi Mumbai Sanpada, Mumbai-400 703 Navi Mumbai–400 709 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaffn9159E M/S Ng Group Ito, 28(2)(3) Plot No.8, Sector 11, Opp R. No. 310, 3 Rd Floor, Juinagar Rly Station, Vashi Rly Station Complex, Vs. Sanpada, Vashi Navi Mumbai Mumbai-400 703 Navi Mumbai–400 709 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aaffn9159E Assessee By : Ms. Nishita Mandalaywala, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.11.2022

For Appellant: Ms. Nishita Mandalaywala, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR

Section 36(1)(ii)Section 41(1)Section 68

report, the learned CIT (A) referred to the letter of the learned Assessing Officer wherein it was stated that the enquiry conducted by the investigation Wing at Kolkata shows that this company is a paper company used for providing accommodation entry. Accordingly, the addition was confirmed. We find that assessee ... loan of ₹1 crore from the lender. The learned Assessing Officer did not conduct any inquiry but merely relied upon the report of the investigation wing of Kolkata. None of the evidences were found to be not reliable, no analysis of the balance sheet or the bank statement

Sh. Ashish Gupta, Haveli Gaindamal Sukhbir Singh, Mandi Jawahar Ganj, Shamli vs. PCIT (Central), Knp at Meerut

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 710/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri P.C. PadwalFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80C

having total income of Rs.5,52,640/- u/s 139 (1) of the Act. A search and seizure operation was carried out by the Investigation Wing in the case on 30.11.2017 at the residential premises of the assessee at Haveli, Jawahar Ganj, Mandi, Shamli. Thereafter on 19.12.2019, order

Sh. Mohit Gupta, Haveli Gaindamal Sukhbir Singh, Mandi Jawahar Ganj, Shamli vs. PCIT (Central), Knp at Meerut

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 709/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri P.C. PadwalFor Respondent: Shri P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80C

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Vandana Ispat Limited, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 68

transaction of share capital as unexplained based on the fact that M/s Debdaru Promoters Pvt Ltd, a company, which as per information from the Investigation wing of Income Tax, Kolkata is one of the companies which are used to divert unaccounted money through banking channels through various layers of companies ... Oriental Bank of Commerce of the Lovely Suppliers (the subscriber), thus, Ld AO had acted on the basis of enquiry report of the Investigation wing of the Income Tax Department Kolkata on the back of the assessee, since, neither the said enquiry report of the Investigation wing nor the information

Income Tax Officer-2, Raigarh vs. Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Jashpur

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 96/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.96/Rpr/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Ito-2, Raigargh Vs Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, College Road, Dist : Jashpur Pan No. : Agepj 9793 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Debashish Lahiri, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 02/08/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31 /10 /2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A)-1, Bilaspur, Dated 06.03.2018, On The Following Ground :- 1. Whether In The Facts & Circumstance & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 6,43,00,000/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & On The Points Of The Law Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 6,43,00,000/- Made By The Ao By Ignoring The Facts As Brought On Record By The Ao That The Assessee Failed To Prove The Identity Of The Creditor, Genuineness Of The Transaction & Creditworthiness Of The Investor As Per The Parameters Of The Legal Provisions U/S 68 Of The Act? 3. Whether In The Facts & Circumstances & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 6,43,00,000/- Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of The Act By Ignoring The Decisions In The Following Lead Cases:- (I) Mcdowell & Company Ltd Vs Commercial Tax Officer (1985) 22 Taxman 11 (Sc). (Ii) M/S Raj Mandir Estates Pvt Ltd Vs Pcit-Iii, Kolkata (Slp No. 22566-22567) Dated 09.01.2017. (Iii) Cit Vs Precision Finance Pvt Ltd., 208 Itr 465(Cal).

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 68

companies are exists for one big reason to help its customers to convert their unaccounted money into white and vise versa. The report of investigation wing from Kolkata on 29/12/2016 has also raised question regarding creditworthiness of the company. It is also submitted that the assessee’s explanation on these ... found at the given address. In addition, CIT(A) has observed that that the Ld AO had relied on the report of the Investigation wing Kolkatta but the same was not confronted to the assessee by ld AO before making the assessment. In this regard Ld CITDR has placed

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajkot vs. Shri Nilesh Natwarlal Sheth, Rajkot

In the result, the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 38/RJT/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Tr Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 38/Rjt/2018 With C.O No.16/Rjt/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2009-2010 D.C.I.T., Shri Nilesh Natwarlal Sheth, Central Circle-2, Vs. Prop. Of M/S.Kruna Finvest, Rajkot. 403-Star Chambers, Harihar Chowk, Rajkot.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT. D.R

Section 133A

present case is an individual and engaged in the business of trading shares & securities. The AO in the present case received the information from investigation wing that the survey under section 133A of the Act was carried on the premises of several stock broker wherein it was found that they

The DCIT, B.K. Circle, Palanpur vs. S. J .Infratech Pvt. Ltd, Banaskantha

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1721/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1721 To 1724/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2013-2014 To 2016-17) D.C.I.T., S.J. Infratech Pvt. Ltd., B.K. Circle, Vs. 1St Floor, Kirti Chambers, Palanpur. Kirti Stambh Road, Palanpur, Banakkantha-385535. Pan: Aamcs7606P

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R

Section 10(38)

controversy arises before us whether the script Regency Trust Ltd is penny stock and appearing in the investigation report carried out by Kolkata investigation wing. Indeed, it has been alleged by the AO that the name of impugned script is appearing in the list of penny stock. In this regard ... learned CIT-A. What has been adopted by the AO for making the addition was the modus of operandi highlighted by the investigation wing of Kolkata. To our understanding, the mere modus of operandi cannot the basis of making the addition or treating the transaction carried out in any share/scrip

Amigo Finstock Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1037/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Bhavik Nagori, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 144ASection 148

failure on the part of the petitioner truly and fully disclosure of all material fact & the same is based on borrowed satisfaction of Investigation wing. 4. The appellant humbly craves leave to add, delete or modify all or any ground of appeal.” 3. The assessee company has filed its return ... this practice which was not its actual loss incurred. The Assessing Officer observed that information received from Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department that co-ordinate survey under Section 133A of the Act was carried out on 23.03.2015 at the premises of 12 different brokers. These surveys were conducted

Sri Kailash Prasad Agarwal, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-22(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the captioned assessee(s) are dismissed

ITA 509/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

based his decision of treating the impugned transaction of sale of shares as bogus transaction by relying on the report of Investigation Wing of the Department wherein the Investigation Wing of the Department had studied the modus operandi of rigging the prices of penny stocks and generation of capital gain