← 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

Diva Diamonds Pvt. Ltd, Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 313/SRT/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shripawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.128/Srt/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Diva Diamonds Pvt.Ltd., Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), 302, Gokul Building, Vs. Mahidharpura, Pipla Sherry, 1St Room No.108, Floor, Surat-395007 Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 1389 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.13/Srt/2020 [Arising In Ita No.128/Srt/2020] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Diva Diamonds Pvt.Ltd., Deputy Commissioner Of 302, Gokul Building, Income-Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. Mahidharpura, Pipla Sherry, 1St Room No.108, Floor, Surat-395007 Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 1389 H (Applicant) (Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.313/Srt/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2014-15) Diva Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Principal Cit-1,Surat 1St 302, Gokul Building, Room No.123, Floor, Vs. Mahidharpura, Pipla Sherry, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Surat-395007 Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcd 1389 H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 263

served on 31.03.2014. The case was reopened on the basis of information received from DGIT(Investigation) Mumbai. In the information received from Investigation Wing, Mumbai it was informed that a search and seizure action was carried out by Investigation wing-Mumbai on Bhanwarlal Jain Group on 03.10.2013, which resulted ... concluded that mere transaction routed through banking channel is not sufficient evidence. The AO by relying upon the report of Investigation Wing of Bhanwarlal Jain Group made addition of 100% of the purchases shown from all three entities. 7.Aggrieved by the 100% addition of impugned purchases in the assessment order

Bhadanes Hitech Technology Computer Pvt.Ltd, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Nashik

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1289/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhadanes Hitech Technology Vs. Ito, Ward Computer Pvt. Ltd. 1(1), Nashik Flat No.10, Padmavishwa Plaza, Nashik Pune Road, Tagore Nagar, Nashik – 422006 Pan : Aadcb9102E Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 68

said that the assessee has established the identity of the parties. It has further been observed that the report of the investigation wing cannot conclusively prove that the assessee's own monies were brought back in the form of share application money. • It is not the burden of the Assessing ... said that the assessee has established the identity of the parties. It has further been observed that the report of the investigation wing cannot conclusively prove that the assessee's own monies were brought back in the form of share application money. As noted in the earlier paragraph

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

In the result, the appeal filed for AY 2009-10 is also allowed

ITA 3675/MUM/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3675, 3676, 3677 & 3678/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi & ShriFor Respondent: Shri R. M. Madhvi, Ld
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153A

search. 10. In so far as the addition on account of purchases are concerned, the AO has noted that information was received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai that in the case of Rajendra Jain Group and other groups, a search and seizure action was carried on 03/10/2013, wherein

Denesh Kumar Sachdeva (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-56(1), New Delhi

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 9562/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 10(38)

with the AO, the shares of JPIL were found to be heavily traded through the top brokers whose activities were being scrutinized by the Investigation Wing. The investigation wing, Kolkata recorded the statement of such brokers and sub- brokers who were involved in purchasing of the scrips of JPIL ... financials of JP1L, the AO came to the conclusion that the modus operandi adopted by the assessee follows the pattern discovered by the Investigation wing during various search and survey operations wherein the merger method adopted by the operators/brokers for providing bogus LTCG has been adopted. 8. Further placing reliance

Dinesh Kumar Sachdeva, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-56(1), New Delhi

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 9561/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 10(38)

with the AO, the shares of JPIL were found to be heavily traded through the top brokers whose activities were being scrutinized by the Investigation Wing. The investigation wing, Kolkata recorded the statement of such brokers and sub- brokers who were involved in purchasing of the scrips of JPIL ... financials of JP1L, the AO came to the conclusion that the modus operandi adopted by the assessee follows the pattern discovered by the Investigation wing during various search and survey operations wherein the merger method adopted by the operators/brokers for providing bogus LTCG has been adopted. 8. Further placing reliance

Dinesh Kumar Sachdeva, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-56(1), New Delhi

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 9560/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 10(38)

with the AO, the shares of JPIL were found to be heavily traded through the top brokers whose activities were being scrutinized by the Investigation Wing. The investigation wing, Kolkata recorded the statement of such brokers and sub- brokers who were involved in purchasing of the scrips of JPIL ... financials of JP1L, the AO came to the conclusion that the modus operandi adopted by the assessee follows the pattern discovered by the Investigation wing during various search and survey operations wherein the merger method adopted by the operators/brokers for providing bogus LTCG has been adopted. 8. Further placing reliance

M/S. Tms Mercantile (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 6797/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2004-05

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

income filed by the assessee was not subjected to any scrutiny assessment. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer received information from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Delhi that the assessee is a beneficiary of accommodation entry amounting to Rs.5,00,000/- taken from M/s. Maa Shakumbhari Stone Crushers ... Based on such information received from the Investigation Wing, the assessing Officer formed belief that income to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/- has escaped assessment. Accordingly, he reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. Though, the assessee objected to the reopening of assessment, however, rejecting the objection

Mahesh Tulsidas Patel, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-3(2)(5), Surat

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 570/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat13 Jul 2022AY 2011-12
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69

case are that the case of assessee for the Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 was reopened on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad that a search action under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) was carried out in case of Barter ... share. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of assessee and the assessment order held that on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad, the assessee has invested Rs. 5.00 5 Mahesh Tulsidas Patel Vs ITO lacs which is not shown in his regular return of income

M/S. Nidan vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(Central)

ITA/49/2022HC Orissa13 Jul 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

ACIT Central Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Ghisulai Kothari, Chennai

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2534/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Sidhappaji (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 132Section 139(9)Section 144Section 271A

other members of the group. The specific amounts could not be arrived at as there were no undisclosed investments or income detected by the Investigation wing of the department. 9.12. It was also submitted that, only in order to buy peace with the department and in considering the probable omission

M/S. Siddhi Diamond, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 2190/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri M. J. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: 08/07/2022
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

alleged to be involved for accommodation entries. Thereafter, the case was reopened on the basis of information received by the AO from Investigation Wing. In remand report, learned AO reiterated that as assessee did not participate in the assessment proceedings, therefore, his evidences under Rule 46A should not be admitted

Income Tax Officer-27(1) (1), Mumbai vs. Shri Aditya Bansilal Damani, Mumbai

ITA 2423/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer- Shri Aditya Bansilal 27(1)(1), Damani, Room No.406, 1301, Luv Kush Towers, 4Th Floor, Tower No.6, Sindhi Society, Vs. Vashi Railway Station Nr. Vivekanand School, Complex, Chembur, Vashi, Mumbai – 400 071 Navi Mumbai Pan: Affpd0348N Maharashtra – 400 703 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

client code modification. The AO has proceeded to make the additions in view of suspicious circumstances, assumptions and allegations arising from the report of investigation wing without conducting necessary enquiries himself and without bringing any circumstantial evidence on record. The facts brought on record by him are not sufficient enough

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai

ITA 814/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai

ITA 813/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai

ITA 810/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai

ITA 809/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai

ITA 808/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 591/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 590/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis

Shri Gajendra Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 589/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, D.R
Section 132Section 153A

reached the conclusion that assessee has owned up the seized material in his statement recorded on oath before investigation wing and during assessment proceedings and thereby made the addition of the undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee on ITA Nos.585/M/2018 & ors. 7 Shri Gajendra Sanghvi substantive basis