“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. Rita Ben Niravbhai Patel, Surat vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Surat

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

ITA 578/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.576/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Smt.Hemanginiben B Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 28, Sangam Society, Parle Point, Surat. Income Tax, Circle-3, Surat. S. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afipp 2238 Q (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.577/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Smt. Bhavnaben Arvindbhai Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 27, Adarshnagar Society, Ambatalawadi S. Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Katargam, Surat – 395004. Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpp 4358 M (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.578/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) Smt. Ritaben Niravbhai Patel, V The Deputy Commissioner Of 1003-1004, Santvan Heights, S. Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Laxmikant Ashram Road, Katargam, Surat. Surat – 395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alxpp 0357 M (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Choksi - Ca Respondent By : Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 07/07/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Three Appeals Filed By Different Assessees, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld. Cit(A)], Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Penalty Order & Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer Under

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi - CAFor Respondent: Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271A

survey carried out in the textile group of Shree Hari gems on 6/11/2015, the textile unit, a detailed report of the inspector of the investigation wing was also furnished wherein it has been ITA Nos.576/SRT/2018 to 578/SRT/2018 Smt.Hemanginiben,Smt.Bhavanaben,Smt.Ritaben, for A.Y. 2014-15 reported that there is no such

Smt. Bhavnaben Arvindbhai Patel, Surat vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Surat

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

ITA 577/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi - CAFor Respondent: Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271A

Smt. Hemanginiben B. Patel, Surat vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Surat

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

ITA 576/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Choksi - CAFor Respondent: Ms.Anupama Singla – Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 271A

Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(1), Surat vs. Shri Deepak Vithaldas Suchak, Surat

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 361/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.361/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Income Tax Officer, V Shri Deepak Vithaldas Suchak, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat. 202, Krishna Awas, 55-Kirandep S. Society, Behind Richie Rich Hotel, Parle Point, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Allps 9195 A (Assessee) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.02/Srt/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No.361/Srt/2018) ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) Shri Deepak Vithaldas Suchak, V The Income Tax Officer, 202, Krishna Awas, 55-Kirandep Ward-1(3)(1), Surat. S. Society, Behind Richie Rich Hotel, Parle Point, Surat – 395007. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Allps 9195 A (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Uday P. Nanavati - Ca Respondent By : Shri O.P.Vaishnav – Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/07/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Uday P. Nanavati - CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Vaishnav – CIT(DR)

Section 144Section 69

these bank accounts for the cheque discounting business as held by the assessing officer in the A.Y. 2009-10 also. The report of the Investigation Wing on which the assessing officer has relied upon also mentions about the assessee's cheque discounting business. The contention of the assessee that ... Learned Departmental Representative (ld DR) for the Revenue submitted that in the assessee’s case, it was found from the enquiry report of the Investigation Wing that assessee did not produce any proof regarding credit entries or turnover during the course of enquiry/verification proceedings. Further, assessee did not produce

Sh. Harneet Singh Chandhoke, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3642/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Saksham Singhal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Avikal Manu, Sr.D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 64

action for framing the assessment in the hands of the assessee is as under: “A search operation was carried out on 17.08.2011 by the Investigation Wing, New Delhi in the case of AEZ Group (Parts of Aerens Group) engaged in the business of real estate. During the search operation certain ... assessee and Rs. 1993560/- in cash, which has been denied by the assessee. Balance amount of Rs. One lac was payable through cheque. The Investigation Wing, New Delhi analyzed the details seized during search operation and found that Ms. Jyotika Chandhoke was having PAN AHMPC7976L which was in the jurisdiction

Shital Anand Keswad, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 12(4), Pune

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

ITA 117/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 139(1)Section 148

response to notice, no return of income has been filed by the appellant. The Assessing Officer after receipt of the statements recorded by the Investigation Wing, Pune from the Sellers stating that the cash deposits made by the said sellers is out of the sale consideration received on the sale ... reading of the assessment order, it would suggest that the Assessing Officer made addition based on the statement given by the sellers before the Investigation Wing of the Department. No doubt, the Assessing Officer had given opportunity to the appellant to rebut the said evidence which was not availed

Shalan Valmik Keswad, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 6(5), Pune

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

ITA 116/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 139(1)Section 148

Golden Job Finder P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-11(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2830/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsian , AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.N.A Nazmi, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

additions made by the Assessing Officer while completing assessment order were on the basis of the detailed investigations carried out by the Investigation Wing which came to the notice of the Assessing Officer during scrutiny assessment proceedings. It can be seen that the computation of assessed income is totally devoid

G.E.Capital Tansportation Fiancial Services Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range 2

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2037/DEL/2002[1994-1995]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2021AY 1994-1995

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Avikal Manu, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

reopening of the assessment. The ld CIT (A) held that the ld AO had sufficient evidence in the form of enquiry report from Investigation Wing, Coimbatore which cannot be ignored and therefore, he confirmed the action of the ld AO u/s 147 of the Act. 5. On the merits

DCIT 9 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Aarohee Management Consultancy Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal is dismissed

ITA 6286/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri Rajesh Kumar ()

Section 147

assessee filed is return of income on 29-09-2011 declaring total income of Rs.44,85,363/-. Subsequently, based on information received from the Investigation Wing at Ahmedabad that the assesse has availed the benefit of short 2 ITA 6286/Mum/2019 term capital loss of Rs.1,16,417/- from sale ... Appeals) deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. 3. We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record. It is evident, the Investigation Wing of the department at Ahmedabad had forwarded certain information to the assessing officer indicating that M/s Devika Proteins Ltd is a shell company

ITO 20(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Jimeet Vipul Modi, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 4297/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice Shri P. P. Bhatt & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4297/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Income Tax Officer-20(2)(1) Shri Jimeet Vipul Modi Room No.216, 2Nd Floor बिाम/ 66/1, Hansa Villa Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Bhaudaji Cross Road Vs. Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Matunga (E), Mumbai-400 019 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aqxmp-9261-G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Paresh Shaparia-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Dr.Shanteshwar Swami -Ld.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 28/06/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 29/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Contest The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai, [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No.Cit(A)-32/It- 584/Ito-20(2)(1)/16-17 Dated 20/03/2018 On Following Grounds: - 1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Deleted The Addition Of Rs.3,21,31,930/- Being Purchase Of Shares Of Penny Stock

For Appellant: Shri Paresh Shaparia-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr.Shanteshwar Swami -Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

19/02/2014 at average price of Rs.33/- approx. per share. 3.2 The quantum of losses was found suspicious in view of the finding of Kolkata investigation wing while carrying out investigation into 84 penny stock scrips. During investigation, statement of various operators, entry-providers and stock-brokers were recorded wherein they

M/S Precious Securities Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-5(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1778/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N V Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sunil D. Surana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

motives could be attributed for incurring of such huge loss. On this point, it is appropriate to mention the investigation conducted by the Investigation Wing of the department. 8. As per the information made available on ITS by the Investigation Wing of the Department, various syndicates have arranged accommodation entry ... company. M/s Shreenath Commercials and Financials Ltd. is one such Penny Stock. In view of the Investigationon done by the Investigation wing regarding the penny stocks syndicate and the assessee indulging in trading in penny stocks, the modus operandi is that the share of this penny stock companies although listed

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Aurangabad vs. M/S. Bmr Hvac Ltd, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1676/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri S.P Walimbe

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

Rs.15 lakhs, allegedly donated by the petitioner to the said Trust. Thus, on the basis of such information supplied by the Investigation Wing is falsified upon perusal of the return filed by the assessee. We also notice that in the return the assessee had claimed to have paid the donation ... Rs.20 lakhs to one Scientific Research of Rural Development. However, the information supplied to the AO by the Investigation Wing does not even suggest that this Trust namely Scientific Research of Rural Development was a dubious Trust and the Investigation Wing had material to believe that the donors of this

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Aurangabad vs. M/S. Bg Li in Electricals Ltd, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1674/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Shri Sharad ShahFor Respondent: Shri S.P Walimbe

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

Madhav Steel, Mumbai vs. ACIT (1)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 438/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodmadhav Steel Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax 1001, Dr. Deshmukh Bldg, Mumbai. Deshmukh Lane Vs. Mumbai – 400 004

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oomen, D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147o

initially processed as such under Sec. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, on the basis of information received by the A.O from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai, that the assessee as a beneficiary had procured bogus purchase bills without actual delivery of goods, its case was reopened under Sec. 147of ... purchase transactions in question were not genuine. In our considered view, in the backdrop of the information received by the A.O from the Investigation wing, Mumbai that the assessee had not made any genuine purchases from the aforementioned parties and had only procured bogus purchase bills from them, a very

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Et Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3563/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Et Infra Developers Pvt. Tax, Ltd. Central Circle-28, Room E-9, Panchsheel Park, No.317, Ara Centre, New Delhi-110017 Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055 Pan-Aacce3646D Revenue Assessee Cross Objection No.277/Del/2016 (Arising Out Of Ita No.3563/Del/2016) [Assessment Year: 2011-12] M/S Et Infra Developers Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, E-9, Panchsheel Park, Central Circle-28, Room New Delhi-110017 No.317, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055 Pan-Aacce3646D Assessee Revenue Revenue By Sh. Satpal Gulati Cit-Dr Assessee By Sh. M.P. Rastogi, Advocate

Section 132Section 153A

from/Rs. 3850 per sq. ft. to Rs.9500 per sq. ft. 4.1. The AO noted that during post search investigation summons were issued by the Investigation Wing to various investors. Some of the investors complied with the summons and filed details according to which:- i. M/s Prologic First India

Income Tax Officer-9(3)(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Goldstar Jewellery India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5466/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

term and long term capital gain and such bogus entries were routed through the companies under its control. It was further noticed by the Investigation Wing that the assessee is one of the beneficiaries of accommodation entries from the said group to the tune of ` 2,57,29,670. Accordingly

ITO 29(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Ashapura Mould Plast, Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 4075/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4075/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito-29(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Ashapura Mould Plast Room No.403, 4Th Floor, Gala No.100, 2Nd Floor, New Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Near, Unique, Industrial Estate, Dr. Videsh Bhavan, Bandra R. P. Road, Mulund (W), Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400080. Mumbai-400051. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadfa1268M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Brajendra Kumar (Dr) Assessee By: None सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/06/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 27/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 05.03.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -39, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2009- 10. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "(1) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Penalty U/S 271(1)(1)(C) Of Rs.81,690/- As The Addition Was On Account A.Y.2009-10 Of Bogus Purchase Of Rs.2,64,355/- @ 12.5% On Bogus Purchased Of Rs.21,14,840/- From Hawala Parties.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar (DR)

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

Rs.2,64,355/- on account of depreciation. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing of the Department in which it was conveyed by the Maharashtra Sales Tax Department that the assessee had taken the bogus purchase entry

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Integer Leasing & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2575/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary[A.Y 2006-07]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'] was initiated by the Investigation Wing on 11.04.2011 in the case of Shri R.S. Bansal. Documents/bills belonging to the assessee were found and seized from the office premises of Shri

M/S. Balmukund Dhanraj Jhawar HUF, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 250/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

upon an investigation report which was admittedly carried out in case of another person and the assessee hereinbeforeus is no way connected with such Investigation Wing of Kolkata neither any opportunity of cross-examination has been rendered to the assessee. He has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex ... provided to the assessee and an opportunity of cross examination is not allowed to the assessee. Hence, material as collected by the Investigation Wing of Kolkata was general in nature and cannot be used in the specific case of the appellant, moreso when the name of the appellant was never