← All Phrases

“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
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.

PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57
417 ITR 334 · 2019 · High Court
96
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
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.

Aradhna Estate Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT
91 Taxmann.com 119 · 2018 · High Court
56
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

Kirtiprada Fashions Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. ITO, Ward -1(1)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Sept 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Malpani, FCAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

respect of all the above investor companies by issuance of commission u/s 131(1)(d) of the Act to the Investigation Wing, Kolkata and these investor companies were found to be bogus and nom traceable. The AO on the analysis of the bank account found that these investor companies were

P I Industries Limited, Udaipur vs. Pr. CIT, Udaipur

ITA 4/JODH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year:2016-17 Pi Industries Limited, Vs. Pr.Cit, Udaisagar Road, Udaipur. Udaipur-313001. Pan No. Aabcp 2183 M

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 32ASection 35(1)(iv)Section 80ISection 92C

findings regarding transfer pricing issues in respect of international transactions or specified domestic transactions or both have been recorded by the Investigation Wing or the AO. 15. The assessee mentioned that the assessee case does not attract any of the condition stipulated above and therefore, no reference was required

Ravindra Heraeus Private Limited, Udaipur vs. Pr. CIT, Udiapur, Udaipur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 14/JODH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur08 Sept 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Sanchita Kumar (CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 263

Search / seizure case: Where search or survey operation has been carried out and findings on the TP issues are recorded by AO or the Investigation wing 3 Cases involving TP Reference to the TPO is mandatory adjustment in earlier assessment years that has been set aside by the ITAT, High ... findings regarding transfer pricing issues in respect of international transactions or specified domestic transactions or both have been recorded by the Investigation Wing or the AO; or a case involving a transfer pricing adjustment in an earlier assessment year that has been fully or partially set-aside by the ITAT

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Narsimharaju Kanumuri, Visakhapatnam

In the result appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 63/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Sept 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.63/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Kanumuri Narasimharaju Circle-3(1) 50-1-23/46, Flat No.202 Visakhapatnam Ksr Complex, C-Block Opp.Rytu Bazaar Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aerpk2717F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.40/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.63/Viz/2021) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Kanumuri Narasimharaju Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 50-1-23/46, Flat No.202 Circle-3(1) Ksr Complex, C-Block Visakhapatnam Opp.Rytu Bazaar Seethammadhara Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aerpk2717F] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.Satyanarayana Raju, DR
Section 143(2)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69A

agricultural income. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 28.09.2018. The AO received information from investigation wing as per which the assessee is Managing Partner of M/s Kasyap Home Needs and has purchased 4500 sq.yards of land at Anadapuram from Shri

Neeta Bothra, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 9(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2508/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2507 & 2508/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Neeta Bothra, 1/1, General Patters Road, Non-Corporate Ward-9(3) Chennai- 600 002. Chennai-6. Pan: Aaipb 0445J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.Suresh Periasamy,JCITFor Respondent: 14.07.2021
Section 10(38)Section 68

from stock companies to arrive at a conclusion that M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Limited is named as penny stock in the report prepared by investigation wing of the Department. 8. The assessee being aggrieved by the assessment order preferred an appeal before CIT(A). Before the learned ... guilty of violating regulatory requirements. He further noted that shares of M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Limited have been specifically named as penny stocks by investigation wing of the Department. The learned CIT(A) further noted that assessee is also unable to explain how a company which is having negligible financial

Neeta Bothra, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 9(3), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2507/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2507 & 2508/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years:2012-13 & 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Mrs. Neeta Bothra, 1/1, General Patters Road, Non-Corporate Ward-9(3) Chennai- 600 002. Chennai-6. Pan: Aaipb 0445J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.Suresh Periasamy,JCITFor Respondent: 14.07.2021
Section 10(38)Section 68

from stock companies to arrive at a conclusion that M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Limited is named as penny stock in the report prepared by investigation wing of the Department. 8. The assessee being aggrieved by the assessment order preferred an appeal before CIT(A). Before the learned ... guilty of violating regulatory requirements. He further noted that shares of M/s. Tuni Textile Mills Limited have been specifically named as penny stocks by investigation wing of the Department. The learned CIT(A) further noted that assessee is also unable to explain how a company which is having negligible financial

Arawali Finlease Private Limited, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 480/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: FixedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263

without having cogent and definite material on record for the alleged accommodation entries and also without making any enquiry about the information/report received from Investigation wing regarding escapement of Income. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has not giving enough time to the Company

Interglobal Steels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 1(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 148/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2011-12]

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rocktim Saikia, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 250(6)Section 68

this process these beneficiary companies gradually brought their unaccounted cash back in the books without paying any lax. As per the information received from Investigation wing, it is noticed that the above mentioned assessee has routed its unaccounted income to the tune of Rs. 40,00,000/- and, took bogus ... paying any tax on the same. Enquiries made by the AQ and Findings subsequent to information received: 4.. On receipt of information from Investigation Wing, return of income was extracted from the ITD Module. The information received from investigation wing has been verified from the assessment records with reference

DCIT CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Sumatichand Gouti Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2757/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit, Cc- 4(2) M/S Sumatichand Gouti बनाम/ R.No. 1918, 19Th Floor, Air Jewellers Pvt Ltd, Vs. 4Th Floor, 80/82, Dhanji India Bldg, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021. Street, Mumbai – 400 004

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar Menon. DRFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain. AR
Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

page letter dated 11.06.2015 along with enclosures of the relevant evidences in 6 Box files. It is also observed that apparently the Investigation Wing has not raised any further queries on the submissions made by the assessee vide this letter dated 11.06.2015. As regards the adverse comments

Late Shri Harshad S. Mehta (Through L/H.Smt.Jyoti H Mehta), Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 23, (Now DCIT Central Range-4 (1)), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6615/MUM/2018[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2021AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 1990-91 Late Shri Harshad S. Dy. Cit, Mehta, Central Circle -23 [Now (Through L/H Smt. Jyoti Dcit, Central Range- H. Mehta), 4(1)], Vs. 32, Madhuli Apartment, Room No.1916, Dr. A.B. Road, Air India Building, Worli, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 018 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Abapm1848F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 1990-91 Dy. Cit, Late Shri Harshad S. Central Circle-4(1), Mehta, Central Range-4, (Through L/H Smt. Jyoti Room No.1916, H. Mehta), Vs. 19Th Floor, 32, Madhuli Apartment, Air India Building, Dr. A.B. Road, Nariman Point, Worli, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai – 400 018 Pan: Abapm1848F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 1990-91 Late Shri Harshad S. Dy. Cit, Mehta, Central Circle -4(1), (Through L/H Smt. Jyoti Air India Building, H. Mehta), Nariman Point, Vs. 32, Madhuli Apartment, Mumbai - 400021 Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Pan: Abapm1848F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta A.RFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel, D.R
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)

Rs.34,94,650/-. In the meanwhile, a search action u/s 132(1) of the Act was carried out on the assessee by the Investigation Wing, Mumbai on 28.02.1992. During the course of search, various incriminating materials were found and seized including some share certificates and documents relating to investments

Ashish Pratap Doshi, Mumbai vs. ACIT- Circle- 19 (1), Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 4921/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4921/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Ashish Pratap Doshi Acit Circle-19(1), Urja Ground Floor, 8, Alkesh Matru Mandir, Tardeo बिाम/ Vs. Dinesh Modi Marg, Road, Mumbai-400 007 Mumbai-400 001 स्थायीलेखासं./ जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabpf-4770-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Ketan Vajani, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Brajendra Kumar– Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 01/09/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/09/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Vajani, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar– Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

addition of Rs.25,00,000/- made by the assessing officer merely on the basis of the statements alleged to have been recorded by the Investigation wing in the case of Bhanwarlal Jain group without appreciating the correct facts of the case. 2. Without any prejudice whatsoever to Ground 1 above ... from an entity namely M/s Lakshmi Diamonds. The said entity allegedly belonged to Shri Bhanwarlal Jain group who was subjected to search action by investigation wing. On the basis of investigation findings, it was alleged that the loans were bogus in nature and therefore, the same were to be added

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5309/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5308/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5307/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5306/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5305/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5304/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal Infinlease P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5303/Del

ITA 5303/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/bills belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Infinlease Ltd., 5, Pushpanjali, Vikas

Bansal in Hold Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5296/Del

ITA 5302/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/books belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Inhold Ltd., 104,1st Floor

Bansal in Hold Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5296/Del

ITA 5301/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 153C

case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by the Investigation wing of the Department on 11.04.2011 in the case of Sh. R.S. Bansal. The documents/books belonging to the assessee, M/s Bansal Inhold Ltd., 104,1st Floor