“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

Keshav Saraf, Kolkata vs. PCIT-15, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 156/KOL/2021[2015-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2022AY 2015-15

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

Section 108Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

operators and share brokers providing bogus LTCG entries and identified 84 BSE listed penny stock which had been used for generating bogus LTCG. The Investigation Wing also identified a large number of beneficiaries such as the assesse who had participated in this operation of generating bogus LTCG ... view to claim tax exemption under Sec. 10(38) of the IT Act. The AO has failed to utilize the evidence furnished by the Investigation Wing of the Department. 9.1. In the instant case, the Assessing Officer not only did not utilize but also did not even keep the detailed

Anil Kumar Aggarawal (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 34(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4322/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatita No.-4322/Del/2019 [Assessment Year: 2012-13] Anil Kumar Aggarwal Huf, Vs Income-Tax Officer, H-22, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Ward-34(3), New Delhi New Delhi. Pan- Aaaha3821M Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.08.2022 O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, Jm: This Appeal, By The Assessee, Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, New Delhi, Dated 23.01.2019, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

disregarded the detailed submissions filed by the appellant and had brushed them aside. The AO had merely relied upon the purported information by investigation wing without even making available to the appellant, the copy of material relied upon, and without appreciating the online trading mechanism on stock exchange. As such ... disregarded the detailed submissions filed by the appellant and had brushed them aside. The AO had merely relied upon the purported information by investigation wing without even making available to the appellant, the cross examination of the person on whose testimony the AO had relied upon. As such, the aggregate

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Income Tax Office vs. Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, Sriganganagar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 55/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT lquo

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

adverse findings. Therefore, the appellant has failed to discharge the onus cast upon it u/s. 68 of the Act to explain the transaction. The Investigation Wing has conducted detailed enquiries, made analysis of the seized/impounded documents and made analysis of beneficiaries. The report prepared contains details ... name of conduits. The said list contains names of companies in which the appellant dealt. Therefore, the findings in the case of Investigation Wing corroborate the independent findings of the AO. Therefore, the AO was not required to allow the appellant the opportunity to cross-examine. The Tribunal

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Income Tax Department, Central Circle-3 vs. M/S N. M. Agrofood Products Pvt. Ltd., Sriganganagar

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 54/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT lquo

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S N. M. Agrofood Products Pvt. Ltd., Sriganganagar

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 53/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

remand report has solely relied upon the unexecuted survey u/s 133A of the Act and therefore even if the information/report of the Investigation Wing is considered as a relevant evidence, however in view of the above discussion that the surveys were not executed in respect of all the 14 companies ... impugned addition of said share capital sustainable. Jammu Metallic Oxides Private Limited Vs. DCIT 55 CCH 618(Jaipur)(Trib) Even if report of the investigation wing Kolkatta was considered as relevant evidence, the same could not be regarded as incriminating material unearth during the course of search and seizure

Goyal Solar Systems Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 468/KOL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2

assessee. On perusal of the assessment record, it is seen that, the case was re-opened on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing in respect of bogus commodity profit on NMCE platform. On going through the assessment record, the following observations are made: 1. Notice ... shell company of entry operator Mr. Hamish Toshniwal and the broker was suspended by NMCE. (A CD was provided by the Investigation Wing regarding data relevant to NMCE trade and involved entry operator / broker firm etc., but the same is not available on record). The officer has accepted the returned

Smt. Sangeetha Bhandari (Individual), Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 6 (3), Chennai

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

ITA 3371/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, F.C.A ""For Respondent: Shri Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

altogether what the AO has framed assessment. When a query was put to ld. Senior reads as under:- “ Information has been received from the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department about various beneficiaries who have taken accommodation entries in the form of Long Term Capital Gain in a scrip

Shri Amit Mangilal Jain, Mumbai vs. ACIT, - 33(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3331/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 3331 & 3332/Mum/2019 (A.Ys: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Shri Amit Mangilal Jain Vs. Acit – 33(1) 2Nd Floor, Arkade House, 103, 1St Floor, Atmaram Sawnt Marg, Eastern House, Kandivali (E), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400101. Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aabpj0925G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Naresh JainFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar.DR

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

action of the Ld AO of re-opening the assessment by issuing notice u/s. 147 which was merely based on information received from Investigation Wing and statement recorded of Shri Akshay Doshi u/s. 131. Confirming the initiation of reassessment proceedings, in absence of any failure on the part of appellant ... order read as under: ITA Nos. 3331, 3332, 4158 & 4159/Mum/2019 Shri Amit Mangilal Jain., Mumbai. 3.1. Gist of information received from the investigation Wing on 22.03.2016 is as follows: i. "Search was carried out in the case of Bhoomi Group and Shri Akshay Doshi, Director of the Bhoomi Group

Prateek Ajay Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-52(1), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5442/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 10(38)Section 68

Aggarwal Vs. ACIT 7. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - XVIII, New Delhi has also erred in relying on the report of Investigation Wing without applying his mind. 8. That the addition was made grossly indulging in surmises without bringing on any direct evidence against the assessee, only

Maruti Rub Plast P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-16(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2094/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Maruti Rub Plast P.Ltd., Vs Ito, C/O-M.K.Bhatt & Co., 302- Ward-16(2), Triveni Complex, E-10-12, New Delhi. Jawahar Park, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi-110092. Pan-Aafcm4647P Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2022

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Therefore, the reasons so recorded under section 147 are nothing but a change of the opinion, based on the information received from the Investigation wing only, further relates to the already examined issue. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (Appeals) has erred ... Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] vide order dated 28.01.2015. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer [“AO”] received certain information from the Investigation Wing and the case of the assessee was re-opened u/s 147 of the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee

Gold Finch Jewellery Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 273/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: 01/08/2022

Section 131Section 133Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

labour charges claimed by the Appellant. 5. In this case, a survey operation u/s. 133 A of the Act was carried out by the Investigation wing i.e. DDIT(Inv), Unit-II(l), Ahmedabad on 29.03.2010. During the Course of survey proceedings, it was found that ITA Nos. 1074/Ahd/2016 & 273/Ahd/2017 [Gold ... entities during the year under appeal. The financial capability have been questioned and it has also been stated that the inquiry conducted by the Investigation Wing led to the conclusion that the so called share applicants had admitted to the fact that they were providing accommodation entries only

Adinath Leasing and Finance P Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1065/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Memebr & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: 08/07/2022

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14ASection 2(47)Section 53A

same are part of paper book at page no.55. The reopening was made on the basis of investigation carried out by the Investigation Wing concluding that there was no transfer of property located at 7, Nalanda Society, Ahmedabad within the meaning of section ... assessment years and after considering all material submitted by petitioner passed assessment order under section 143(3) - Later, on basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Assessing Officer issued notices for reopening assessment on ground that petitioner entered into high value financial transactions and availed accommodation entries

Gold Finch Jewellery Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1074/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: 01/08/2022

Section 131Section 133Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2, Nashik

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

ITA 1183/PUN/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1183/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sidharth Ratanlal Bafna, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, 96, Nayantara, Subhash Nashik. Chowk, Jalgaon-425001. Pan : Algpb5972R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sunil Ganoo Revenue By : Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.08.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Nagpur (‘The Pcit’) Dated 08.06.2018 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Pr.Cit Has Grossly Erred In Exercising His Revisional Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The I.T. Act 1961. The Impugned Revisional Order Passed By The Learned Pr.Cit Is Patently Illegal., Void Ab Initio, Bad In Law, Arbitrary, Perverse, Without Jurisdiction & Being Devoid Of Merits The Same May Please Be Deleted. 2. Since The Learned Pr.Cit Has Failed To Revise The Directions Given By The Learned J.C.I.T. Nashik To The Learned Assessing Officer In The Matter Of Framing The Impugned Assessment Order U/S 143[3] R.W.S.L53A

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar

Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

purchase and sale of penny stock script of M/s. S.V. Electricals Ltd. in the light of the information received by him from the Investigation Wing of the Department, even if the information is received subsequent to original assessment order. It is evident from the statement recorded by the Assessing Officer

Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Pr. Commission of Income Tax, -1, Surat

In the result, Both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 50/SRT/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.49 & 50/Srt/2021 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Principal Commissioner Of 101-102, 1St Floor, Sakar Textile Income-Tax-1, Aayakar Bhawan, Market, Ring Road, Surat-395002. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm2394Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent By Shri H. P. Meena, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 28/06/2022 22/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)Section 263Section 68

Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd. entries. As mentioned earlier, the Ld. Assessing Officer has acted merely on the basis of information received from the Investigation wing. The ratio laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs Vrindaban Farms Pvt. Ltd. squarely gives shelter to the assessee, wherein ... proxies, Sh. Jwala Parasd Gupta and Sh. Sanjay Kumar Tibrewal in the investor companies of the assessee company as per relevant Reports of Investigation Wing. (5) This is a case of possible money-laundering by use of the web of Kolkata based entry operators. The basic and apparent premises

Mahotsav Creation Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Pr. Commission of Income Tax, -1, Surat

In the result, Both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 49/SRT/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 151(1)Section 263Section 68

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Dinesh T Gupta, Surat

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 461/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.440/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) Dinesh T Gupta Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(7), Room No. 620, No.6/2037, Papadwala Building Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- Bhojabhai Ni Sheri, Mahidarpura, 395001 Surat-395003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Airpg 8408 P (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.P.Meena– CIT-DR &

Section 143(3)Section 148

negative from 26.06.2006 onwards and no sale is possible in absence of purchases. The AO relied on the statement of Bhanwarlal Jain recorded by Investigation Wing against, copy of purchase bill, copy of bank statement, showing payment, day to day stock register, incoming and outgoing diamonds and daily stock tally ... also observed that there is no denying circumstances under which statement were made by Bhanwarlal Jain and the elaborate modus-operandi unearthed by Investigation Wing, Mumbai, which has created sufficient suspicion regarding the purchase made by the assessee. The said parties are assessed with Central Circle, Mumbai where they

Dinesh T Gupta, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 441/SRT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.P.Meena– CIT-DR &

Section 143(3)Section 148

Dinesh T Gupta, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 440/SRT/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri H.P.Meena– CIT-DR &

Section 143(3)Section 148

Income Tax Officer-2(5), Kanpur vs. Shri Vikas Agarwal, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 128/LKW/2020[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow22 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 268ASection 5(2)Section 6

case, the prime issue is the sale of shares of a company which was later on established as a penny stock company by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata and also, as per the observation of the assessing officer in the assessment order, the sale of shares was found