“investigation wing”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 14712,584 judgments

The decision most relied on for investigation wing is Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (329 ITR 110), cited in 217 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on investigation wing

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.

PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57

417 ITR 334 · 2019 · High Court

citing judgments

An assessment completed under Section 143(3) cannot be reopened after four years solely based on third-party information or opinions, such as from an Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer applying their own independent mind to the material and having new, independent material on record.

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.

Aradhna Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

91 Taxmann.com 119 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer is justified in reopening assessment proceedings based on information received from the Investigation Wing, even when recording findings also rely on documents already on record, provided all procedural requirements for reassessment are met.

Judgments citing investigation wing

Smt. Gurjeet Kaur, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- IV (2), Jalandhar

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our

ITA 627/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69Section 91

agreement to sell is not a dumb document and authenticity of the same stands established in the course of enquiries conducted by the investigation wing. Accordingly, I hold that AO was justified in treating an amount of Rs. 1.50 crores as unexplained money of the appellant

M/S Credence Developers, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 28(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 414/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 414/मुं/2020 ("न.व 2010-11) M/S. Credence Developers, Shop No.11, Shree Ganesh Homes, Plot No.12, Sector-3, Ghansoli, Navi Mumbai 400 701 Pan: Aadfc-9121-B ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer – 28(1)(3), Room No.327, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Station, 3Rd Floor, Vashi, Navi Mumbai 400 703 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Aakash Kumar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri R.A. Dhyani सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2022

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal and Aakash KumarFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani

Section 143(1)

Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘ the Act’) and intimation was received. Thereafter, on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Ahmadabad, assessment for assessment year 2010-11 was reopened. As per the information received from Investigation Wing, the assessee was allegedly one of the beneficiary ... Future and Option segment. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer merely on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing made addition of Rs.19,59,694/- on account of alleged shifting of profits in shares and derivatives by misuse and manipulation of CCM facility. The ld. Authorized

Smt. Santosh Anil Parmar, Mumbai vs. ITO-22(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2009-10 are allowed

ITA 7069/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7067/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2007-08) आअसं. 7068/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2008-09) आअसं. 7069/मुं/2019 ("न.व 2009-10) Smt. Santosh Anil Parmar, 501, Prabhat Co-Op Hs Society Ltd. Plot No.;415A, D.K.Sandhu Marg , Chembur, Mumbai 400 071 Pan:Agkpp-5786-E ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer-22(2)(2), 4Th Floor, Tower No.6, Vashi Rly Station, Navi Mumbai 400 703 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Devendra Kothari ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri R.A. Dhyani सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2021 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2022

For Appellant: Shri Devendra KothariFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

submitted that a search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Act was undertaken in the case of M/s. Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. by Investigation Wing on 25/11/2009. During the course of search, statement of Mukesh Choksi was purportedly recorded. On the basis of the said statement, the assessment

Smt Santosh Anil Parmar, Mumbai vs. ITO-22(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2008-09 and 2009-10 are allowed

ITA 7067/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Devendra KothariFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

M/S. Bhagyaraaj Vyapaar Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Ld. PCIT-1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 429/KOL/2021[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata18 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am]

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

notice u/s 148 of the Act based on 2 M/s. Bhagyaraaj Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. , AY: 2011-12 the reason that he received information from Investigation Wing that the assessee has received accommodation entry to the tune of Rs. 50 Lakhs. Thereafter, the AO reopened the assessment of the assessee

Vidushi Tayal, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 20(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 3452/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2009-10 Vidushi Tayal, Vs. Ito, 37, Rampuri, Kalka Ji, Ward-20(4), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Abgpt5656C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Mahna, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mahna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147o

individual and derives income from house property, business income and long-term capital gain. On the basis of information received from the ITO (Investigation Wing), Unit-III(2) of the Department, the AO reopened the assessment of the case after recording the following reasons:- “ An information has been received from

Income Tax Officer-3(4), Kanpur vs. Shri Santosh Kumar Agarwal, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 153/LKW/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 69A

reproduced below: “Decision: I have gone through the facts of the case, relevant part relied upon by the AO, of the report of the investigation wing and submissions of the appellant. I.T.A. No.153/Lkw/2020 Assessment. Year:2014-15 6 “Facts in this case are not disputed. The assessee is an individual ... system and utilized the same in finalizing the assessment. Therefore, AO on the basis of the detailed and comprehensive enquiries made by Investigation Wing, Kolkata made the assessment. AO made the addition of Rs. 5,41,223/- by treating the exempt capital gain income as unexplained income under the head

ITO, Ward-23(4), New Delhi vs. Skyview Consultants (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6456/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6456/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Income Tax Officer, Vs Skyview Consultants (P) Ltd., Ward-23(4), M-107, Greater Kailash, Part-Ii, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110048 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaics2111H Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17.02.2022

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

Section 147

there promotional activities and to collect all statutory forms etc. 4. The case was reopened on the basis of TEP filed with the investigation wing and their detailed report, with information and documents from the O/o DDIT (Inv.), unit 2 (2), New Delhi vide their letter F. No. DDIT ... Erstwhile M/s Seagram India Pvt. Ltd) for providing field support to their principal at various locations. As per the TEP received in the investigation wing of the department the said company made collections from their principals i.e. M/s Pernod Ricard India Pvt. Ltd. The Company further issued account payee cheques

Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) Kolkata vs. Mayapur Dham Pilgrim and Visitors Trust

The appeal stands dismissed

ITAT/312/2017HC Calcutta16 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. P. K. Bhowmick, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv

Section 12ASection 133ASection 260ASection 80G

Human Genetics & Population Health. The CIT(E) has also extensively referred to the statement given by the treasurer of the said organisation before the Investigation Wing and also referred to the post survey developments noting that the said organisation had filed an application before the Income Tax Settlement Commission

Sh. Hafizuddin Hazi, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 3690/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 150(2)Section 151(2)Section 154

Polyvinyal (I) Ltd., reported in 396 ITR 5 (Del) submitted that the Hon’ble Court has held that the information received from the Investigation Wing was not tangible material per se without a further enquiry having been undertaken by the AO who had deprived himself of that opportunity 6 that

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Alpha Nippon Innovatives Ltd

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1360/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1360/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 D.C.I.T, Alpha Nippon Innovatives Ltd., Circle-1(1)(1), Vs. (Formerly Known As Tim Engineering Ahmedabad. Technologies Pvt. Ltd.) Survey No.310, Vii, Bhamsara, Bavla, Bhamsara, Gujarat-382230. Pan: Aacct5088N

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, C.I.T.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 50CSection 68

Tradelink (P) Ltd. v ITO reported in 2017 146 DTR (Guj) 182. In that case on the basisi of the information received from the investigation wing of the Income Tax department tq the effect that the companies and A.Y. 2012-13 4 entities owned and controlled by Pratik R Shah

Smita Naresh Varaiya, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3282/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

Section 143(3)Section 148

assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. The assessment was so framed pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing that the assessee procured bogus purchase bills of diamond for Rs.70.28 lakhs from an entity, viz. M/s Vitrag Jewels which is said to be group

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-9, Kolkata vs. Manju Osatwal

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

ITAT/96/2021HC Calcutta11 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

For Appellant: Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Swapna Das, Adv

Section 10(38)Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 180Section 182Section 260ASection 263

dated 15th January, 2019 had denied having paid any commission. Nevertheless, the PCIT taking note of certain material which was culled out from the Investigation wing of the Department during the course of search and seizure proceedings against certain stock brokers there appears to have been statements recorded that they ... such conclusion based upon certain statements which were recorded from certain other stock brokers during the search and survey operations conducted by the investigation wing of the Income tax Department. Further, we note that there is an annexure in Form I to declaration under Section

M/S Ski Himalayas Ropeways Pvt. Ltd., Paonta Sahib vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1582/CHANDI/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavआदेश/Order

Section 131Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 69ASection 80I

reference from hotels, income from reference from fun games and reference income from paragliding and cash receipt of disposable sale were submitted before the Investigation Wing. The submissions and documents so filed were summarily rejected by the Investigation Wing. The report of the Investigation Wing, contents of which find mention ... Rs.18,75,000/-, the submissions of the assessee were not accepted. The reasoning adopted by the AO was that the basis findings of the Investigation Wing, the documents produced by the assessee regarding receipts from sale of tickets, were not reliable. The AO further held that keeping such huge cash

M/S. Sharda Lab P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO-8(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1680/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Akash KumarFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Kabra

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

appeal.” 7. At the time of hearing, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that reasons are based on information and findings of the Investigation Wing. The A.O. did not apply his mind to the same. The A.O. merely concluded without verifying the facts that it is a case ... Mumbai which is material for recording the reasons for reopening of the assessment. The Ld. D.R. submitted that enquiries were conducted by the Investigation Wing, therefore, no fresh enquiry is required to be conducted by the A.O. 9. The Ld. D.R. submitted that at the time of commencement

Rakesh Kumar Pawa, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-18, New Delhi

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

ITA 8059/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2009-10 Rakesh Kumar Pawa, Vs Acit, E-21,Park Lane, Circle-18, Kalindi Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Agrpp6439R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhishek Mathur, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Mathur, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

declaring a loss of Rs.5,01,092/-. A search and seizure and survey operation u/s 132/133A of the IT Act was conducted by the Investigation Wing in the case of the assessee along with other cases of the Jagat group. In response to the notice u/s 153A, the assessee submitted

Anush Finlease & Construction Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 18, New Delhi

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

ITA 280/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jain, Vice-Dr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 280/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Anush Finlease & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Plot No. 11, Cbd Centre, Shahdara, Central Circle-18, New Delhi-110032 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacca7004R Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 07.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.02.2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 131Section 68

exempted long term capital gain entries. The ld. CIT(A) held that in the present case also 6 Anush Finlease & Construction Pvt. Ltd. the Investigation Wing has identified 14 such companies who have given entries to the appellant. The remaining loan givers were either not existing on the given address

The ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad vs. Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd.(Formerly Known As J.P.Fincorp Services Pvt. Ltd), Ahmedabad

ITA 1235/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1235/Ahd/2019 With C.O.No.189/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-2011 A.C.I.T., Ambe Tradecorp Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2(4), Vs. (Formerly Known As J.P. Fincorp Ahmedabad. Services Pvt. Ltd.) Iscon House, B/H Rembrandit Building, Off. C.G. Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aabcj8599F

For Appellant: Ms Nupur Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT. D.R

Section 132Section 147Section 68Section 69

ATCPP9642E) for the A.Y. 2010-11 by the 1TO, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad which is based on the information received from the Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad, a to credit of Rs.33,36,89,804/- in her bank account with Indian Bank, Navrangpura Branch, Ahmedabad during F.Y. 2009-10 relevant

M/S. Meridian Gems, Surat vs. ACIT CC -1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 451/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Suchek AnchliyaFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 251(2)

return of income filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on the information received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, that the assessee is a part of Bhawarlal Jain Group, in whose case during the course of search and seizure action under section

Income Tax Officer Ward-1(3), Raipur vs. Smt. Rachna Devi Sadhwani L/H of Late Shri Kalyan Das Sadhwani, Raipur

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed, with no order as to cost

ITA 15/BIL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Feb 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 15/Blpr/2012 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2003-2004

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250Section 253(2)Section 54FSection 68

referred to Annexure ‘S’ in his order which are copies of statement and affidavit of one Mr Mahesh Garg recorded at New Delhi by investigation Wing during the year 2004. In his statement and affidavit, Mr. Mahesh Garg has admitted that he is an entry operator and had explained ... were not at all recorded in the course of assessment proceedings before him, but they were pre-existing statements recorded by the Investigation Wing, however the same solely cannot form the basis for making an addition in the absence of proper enquiry and examination. In our considered opinion