“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

DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3) Erstwhile DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, Mumbai vs. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 4094/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

requisite details to substantiate the purchases. 7. The facts in brief are that the Assessing Officer noted that information was received from the Investigation Wing that search and seizure action was carried out on Rajendra Jain group and other group from 03.10.2013. During the search and post search inquiries ... Officer noted that assessee has made purchases from 4 parties – Janex Enterprises of Rs. 1,71,000/- which, as per information received from the Investigation Wing, was appearing in the list of suspicious dealers of Maharashtra VAT Department. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made 100% disallowance of the said purchases

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, (Now DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3)), Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 3680/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, (Now DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3)), Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 3679/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

M/S Premji Valji & Sons, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

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

ITA 125/RJT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 125/Rjt/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2017-2018 M/S Premji Valji & Sons, The Principal Commissioner Of “Kuvarjibhai Tower”, Vs. Income Tax, Palace Road, Rajkot-1, Rajkot. Rajkot. Pan: Aacfp7696K

For Appellant: Shri R.D. Lalchandani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 269S

Staff their roles/duties assigned as on 08.11.2016 along with staff register submitted as required by you. The same was also submitted before the Investigation wing of the department. 5. We have already submitted the bills of cash sales as on 08.11.2016 along with the names of the customers

M/S. Arshiya Rail Infrastucture Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - CC-6(4), Mumbai

In the result appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 574/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed a/wFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 115Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153C

noted that the said account was being frequently credited followed by immediate transfer of funds to various parties. It was further observed by the Investigation Wing that though a huge amount of credit entries is observed from its bank account, Silverson Logistics Private Limited has shown to have turnover ... noted that the said accounts were being frequently credited followed by immediate transfer of funds to various parties. It was further observed by the Investigation Wing that Santu Maity is a common Director in Kalyani Vincom Private Limited, Shivbhumi Tradelink Private Limited and Time Dealcom Private Limited and 42 other

Scorditte Stainless India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 5(3) (1), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground No. 1 to 3 raised by the Appellant are allowed

ITA 2002/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Rajkumar SinghFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

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

accordingly could only be brought to tax only after the case was selected for scrutiny on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing in respect of Bogus Purchases. Moreover the CIT(A) and ITAT has confirmed the Bogus purchases made by the assessee at 12.5% of Bogus Purchases

Ratn & Co., Mumbai vs. ITO -19(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed

ITA 1981/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalratan & Co. 5 – Navyug Sagar, Teen Batti, Walkeshwar, Mumbai-400006. Pan: Aadfr3713J ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-19(3)(1) Matru Mandir, Mumbai-400007. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Mr. Suchek Anchaliya Respondent By : None Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Nfac’] Dated 11.09.2021 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As [‘The Act’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Not Considering That The Assumption Of Jurisdiction By The Ld. Assessing

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek AnchaliyaFor Respondent: None

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Exports (Bhanwarlal Jain Group) 5,30,530/- Total 5,30,530/- 7. Before proceeding further, a brief background of the conclusion derived by the Investigation Wing in respect of the modus operandi involved in the Diamond industry for issuance of fake bill is first discussed. The Mumbai Investigation Wing, through ... form of unsecured loans to the interest parties, issuing of bogus sale bills to various parties etc. The conclusion drawn by the Investigation Wing is bifurcated in two parts, which is discussed below- The initial part is devoted in establishing the fact that there are almost 70 concerns which were

Sureaksha DB Realty, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 30(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 482/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Suraksha Db Realty The Dy. Commissioner Of Behind Orchid Suburbia, Ground Income-Tax 30(3), Floor, Off; Link Road, Kandivali Room No.601, C-13, Vs. 6Th Floor, Bkc, (West), Mumbai-400 067 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abofs0694R Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, Ar Department By : Shri Op Sharma, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri OP Sharma, CIT DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69CSection 80

reopen the case. In this regard, I do not agree with the AR that the AO has merely relied upon the information received from investigation wing to reopen the appellant’s case and no independent conclusion was formed by AO. 13 The DGIT (investigation), Mumbai communicated about the information regarding

Money Managers, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 125/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (C.A) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi (JCIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

higher figures on account of ‘client code modification’. On the basis ITA Nos.124 & 125/Chny/2021 of analysis of data as received by Ld. AO from investigation wing, Ld. AO held that the assessee received fictitious loss under these transactions overlooking the arguments of the assessee that the assessee was not aware

Money Managers, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 124/CHNY/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (C.A) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Bhoopathi (JCIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

Shri Mukesh Agarwal, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3093/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3093/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. Mr.Mukesh Agarwal, The Dy. Commissioner- No.127A, Brickline Road, Flat 3181, Of Income Tax, Tvh Kumbini Square, 18Th Floor, Central Circle-3(2), 3Rd Block, Purasawalkam, Chennai. Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aafpk 6968 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Guru Bashyam, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

assessee was provided with a copy of statement of Shri. Beni Prasad Lahoti, accommodation entry operator, from whom statement was recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata, which has proved beyond doubt that: a. he has few of his employees namely, 1. Shri. Navnit kumar Singhania, 2. Shri. Jaiprakash ... During relevant assessment year the assessee received Rs.3,05,000 as loan from various Jama Kharachi/Shell/Paper Companies b. On basis of information received from Investigation wing that assessee was Involved in taking accommodation entries, the assessee was asked to produce the lenders. Even after sufficient time was. accorded, the assessee

Southern Engineers, Mumbai vs. ACIT 1791), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1951/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu GandhiFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

vide order, dated 03.11.2011 determining total income of the Appellant at INR 43,22,260/-. Subsequently, on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai that the Appellant has availed bogus entry of INR 38,19,036/- from M/s Hanuman Steel, a proprietorship concern Mr. Jagnesh K. Desai

M/S. Euro Diamonds Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 9(2) (4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1545/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Section 10A

contentions and perused the record. We noticed that the assessing officer has made the impugned addition on the basis of generalised information given by investigation wing that M/s Bhanwarlal Jain group is engaged in the business of providing accommodation sales bills without actually supplying the goods. There is no material

Luhariwala Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 10 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2251/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Bleluhariwala Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd., V. Acit – 10(2)(1) A-204, Corporate Centre Premises Room No. 509, 5Th Floor Andheri Kurla Road, Marol Pipeline Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400059 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0784F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashok Bansali Department By : Shri Mehul Jain

For Appellant: Shri Ashok BansaliFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain

Section 131Section 143(2)

which Shri Devesh Upadhyay is a common Director and are Kolkata based companies. The Assessing Officer observed in his order that the Kolkata Investigation wing has found in search operation carried in the case of companies controlled by Devesh Upadhyay that he is involved in providing accommodation entries by relying

M/S. Vidhata Enclave Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Wrd-13(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1486/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Vidhata Enclave Pvt. Ltd. Shop No.6, Sadguru Shopping Centre, Tank Road, Bhandup West, Mumbai-400078 Pan: Aaccv2929C ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward-13(3)(3), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. Kavita Kaushik Date Of Hearing : 09/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 06/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik

Section 68

filed its return of income on 08-01- 2011 declaring taxable income of Rs 3,671/-, subsequently, as per the information received from the investigation wing of the income tax department that the assessee received Rs 20,00,000/- from one hawala/entry operator namely Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain. There

Iftekhar Mukhtar Siddiqui, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 26(1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 5275/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyaliftekhar Mukhtar Siddiqui, Room No. 60, Prem Nagar, Behind Lucky Hotel, Sion Agra Road, Sion, Mumbai-400022 Pan: Bgsps0603N ...... Appellant Vs. Ito-26(1)(5), C-1 Building, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051. ..... Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ms. Kavita Kaushik Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/09/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 271FSection 274Section 44ASection 69A

reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification. b) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiate merely on the information received from investigation wing. c) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiated when the LD. CIT(A) have reason to suspect and not reason to believe. 2. On the facts

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai vs. Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1552/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Us:-

Section 143(3)Section 153C

seeking to reopen the assessment of the assessee. M/s. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd., 4.2. A limited search and seizure action was conducted by the Investigation Wing, New Delhi on the basis of information passed on by the CBI on 15/10/2013. The information received from the CBI on 15/10/2013 over phone

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1017/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Us:-

Section 143(3)Section 153C

The ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2244/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

accordingly assessed them u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. The AO came to such conclusion on the basis of report of investigation wing of income tax department, which have alleged that the prices of certain shares termed as “penny stocks” have been rigged in order to gain ... find any such incriminating material during the course of search. He submitted that the AO has fully relied upon external information supplied by the investigation wing of the Income tax department alleging artificial manipulation of prices by certain people in order to take undue advantage of artificial capital gains/capital losses

ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitan Chhatwal, Mumbai

In the result, the both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2243/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68