← 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

Smt. Aparna Jhawar, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 249/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

Shri Gaurav Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 247/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

investigation report which was admittedly carried out in case of another person and the assessee hereinbefore us 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 Court ... 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

Shri Gopal Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 246/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

investigation report which was admittedly carried out in case of another person and the assessee hereinbefore us 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 Court ... 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

Govardhan Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 245/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

investigation report which was admittedly carried out in case of another person and the assessee hereinbefore us 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 Court ... 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

Ajay Kumar Balmukund Jhawar HUF, Sendhwa vs. ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 244/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

Shri Vrindavan Tayal, Sendhwa vs. The ITO Sendhwa, Sendhwa

ITA 242/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2014-15

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

investigation report which was admittedly carried out in case of another person and the assessee hereinbefore us 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 Court ... 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

ITO, Ward 3(4), Kalyan vs. Smt Sunita C Khandelwal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3505/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 3505/Mum/2019 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Income Tax Officer Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal Ward-3(4), Kalyan Prop. Amita Steel 2N D Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Corporation, फनाभ/ Road, Kalyan-421301 E-1/5, Near Avery Bridge, Kalyan Shill Road, Midc, Vs. Dombivali (E)-421203 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Afgpk6867E अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri Bharat Andhale, Cit Dr प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Rajendra Deshpande, Ar ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Revenue Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-1, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. 10352/2017-18 Vide Dated 19.03.2019. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(4), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Y. 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 15.12.2017 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). Smt. Sunita C. Khandelwal; Ay 10-11 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Revenue Is As Regards To The Order Of Cit(A) Restricting The Disallowance Of Bogus Purchase/ Unproved Purchases At 12.5% By Estimating The Gross Profit Under Section 69C Of The Act Instead Of 100% Disallowance Made By Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Andhale, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Deshpande, AR
Section 143(3)Section 69C

concern of M/s Amita Steel Corporation. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the Department has received information from DDIT Investigation Wing 2(3), Mumbai that the assessee is beneficiary of bogus accommodation bills/ entries received from M/s Amita Steel Corporation amount

Myra the Diamond Studio, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 33(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5939/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ Ita No. 5939/Mum/2018 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2007-08) M/S Myra- The Diamond Studio, The Commissioner Of Flat No.3, Monalisa, Road No.1, Income Tax (Appeals)-45, फनाभ/ House,1 St Bandra (W), Mumbai-400 050 103, Earnest Floor, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400067 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aabfm0951F अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri M. Subramanian, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri Bharat Andhale, Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.07.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Arising Out Of Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)]-45, Mumbai [In Short Cit(A)], In Appeal No. Cit(A)-45/Ito-33(2)(3)/Ita-23/2015-16 Vide Dated 23.07.2018. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 33(2)(3), Mumbai (In Short Ito/ Ao) For The A.Y. 2006- 07 Vide Order Even Date 30.03.2015 Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’). Myra The Diamond Studio; Ay 07-08 2. The Only Issue In This Appeal Of Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Reopening Of Assessment Proceedings Under Section 147 Read With Section 148 Of The Act Despite The Fact That There Is No Failure On The Part Of The Assessee To Disclose All The Materials Facts Relating To Assessment & That Also Beyond Four Years. For This, Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)

correctly verifying the records of the assessee which showed the entries for purchases taken by the assessee from the same three concerns received from Investigation wing. For making an addition under section 68, there should be a cash credit in the books of the assessee. From Myra the diamond Studio

ITO 10(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Heighten Trading Company, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed as such

ITA 834/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: The Itat. Hence Learned Counsel Submitted That This Appeal By The Revenue Is Not Maintainable.

ITAT. The plea of the case relating to information received from outside agency is not sustainable as information is received by AO from investigation wing of Income Tax Department itself which cannot be said to be an outside agency. Hence this appeal by the revenue is liable to be dismissed

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Aster Building Solution Private Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 471/HYD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Ranka, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 153A

such un-abated assessments have to be initiated and finalised only on the basis of all the incriminating material found or seized by the investigation wing as it has been held in E.N.Gopa Kumar Vs.CIT (2016) [390 ITR 131]; Gopal Lal Bhadruka (supra); CIT Vs. Kesarvani Zarda Bhandar Tax Appeals

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Aster Building Solution Private Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 470/HYD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Ranka, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 153A

such un-abated assessments have to be initiated and finalised only on the basis of all the incriminating material found or seized by the investigation wing as it has been held in E.N.Gopa Kumar Vs.CIT (2016) [390 ITR 131]; Gopal Lal Bhadruka (supra); CIT Vs. Kesarvani Zarda Bhandar Tax Appeals

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Aster Private Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 468/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Ranka, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153(1)Section 153A

such un-abated assessments have to be initiated and finalised only on the basis of all the incriminating material found or seized by the investigation wing as it has been held in E.N.Gopa Kumar Vs.CIT (2016) [390 ITR 131]; Gopal Lal Bhadruka (supra); CIT Vs. Kesarvani Zarda Bhandar Tax Appeals

ITO 6 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Intero Infrastructure and Trading Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 301/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2) M/S Intero Infrastructure & 5Th Floor, Room No. 503, Vs. Trading Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 412 Sunshine Plaza, Churchgate, Naigaum Cross Road, Mumbai – 4000 20 Dadar East, Mumbai – 400014

For Appellant: Shri D. Dharam Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(3)

Intelligence (DGGI).” However, as the addition in the case of the present assessee is based on the information received by the A.O from the Investigation Wing of the Income-tax department, Mumbai, therefore, the same would not fall within the meaning of “external sources” as had been specified in Para

Nisha Navin Punjani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 29 (2) (4) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5799/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2013-14
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

said seizure of cash by the police authorities had happened on 12/12/2012. Pursuant to the receipt of information from the police authorities, the investigation wing of Income Tax department i.e. DDIT (Inv.) Unit-VII(3), Mumbai confronted Shri Jignesh Jayantilal Doshi seeking explanation for the seized cash of Rs.23 ... above the cheque portion of Rs.19,75,000/- on sale of property. Based on the said statement of Shri Jignesh Jayantilal Doshi, the Investigation wing passed on the information to the ld. AO of the assessee and the ld. AO recorded the same in the reasons and reopened the assessment

Income Tax Officer-15(1)(2), Mumbai vs. F.M.Land Developers Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4540/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2021AY 2012-13
Section 133(6)Section 68

addition made u/s.68 of the Act, without appreciating that the case is related to the scam created by Pravin Jain group where the Investigation wing has carried out extensive enquiries to establish that the loan was given to provide accommodation entries hence the credit worthiness of the creditors

Pratap Bajaj, Indore vs. ITO-4(1) Indore, Indore

In the result, appeals of the assessee(s) namely Smt

ITA 489/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of claim of assessee of exempted LTCG based on information/statement gathered by investigation wing of the department, without any opportunity to cross examine such persons and without providing such documents for assessee’s comments, which is quite unjust, illegal ... financial performance of the company. Further, we also find from record that Ld. AO also didn't confront copies of statements recorded by Investigation Wing, Kolkata of Sh, Nikhil Jain, Sh. Sanjay Vora, Sh. Rakesh Somani, Sh. Anil Kumar Khemka and Sh. Bidyoot Sarkar to the 13 Smt. Manorama Devi

Manorama Devi Sharma, Indore vs. ITO-3(1), Indore

In the result, appeals of the assessee(s) namely Smt

ITA 39/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of claim of assessee of exempted LTCG based on information/statement gathered by investigation wing of the department, without any opportunity to cross examine such persons and without providing such documents for assessee’s comments, which is quite unjust, illegal ... financial performance of the company. Further, we also find from record that Ld. AO also didn't confront copies of statements recorded by Investigation Wing, Kolkata of Sh, Nikhil Jain, Sh. Sanjay Vora, Sh. Rakesh Somani, Sh. Anil Kumar Khemka and Sh. Bidyoot Sarkar to the 13 Smt. Manorama Devi

M/S Radhishwari Devlopers P Ltd, Indore vs. Pr CIT -2 Indore, Indore

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

ITA 493/IND/2018[13-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Jul 2021

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. (Now Known As R.C. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. ) Indore : Appellant Pan :Aafcr1916A V/S Pr. Cito-2 : Respondent Indore Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema Sr. Adv. With Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2021

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

connection, I have also issue a letter to Pr. DIT (Inv.), Mumbai for carrying out the enquiries. Recently information has also been received from Investigation Wing that one of the lenders namely KCL Infra Projects from whom the assessee has taken substantial loan during the year has also been found ... been done by the departmental M/s. Radheshwari Developers Pvt. Ltd. authorities earlier. For this purpose, he is directed to take help of the Investigation Wing to get the matter completely examined. The line of investigation/inquiry is only inclusive and he is free to make any other investigation on the issue

Smt. Sabreen, Kanpur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(4), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed and Stay Application is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 498/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

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

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 144Section 38

claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act and which the authorities below have denied by relying on the report of the investigation wing of Kolkata wherein the report has said that through a racket of many persons, which included operators, exit providers and promoters of a few companies ... reads as under: “21. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the Assessing officer was carried away by the report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata. It can be seen that the entire assessment has been framed by the Assessing Officer without conducting any enquiry from the relevant parties

ACIT, Central Circle- 20, New Delhi vs. Alchemist Capital Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7773/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT/DRFor Respondent: None
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153A

case are that a search & seizure and survey operation u/s. 132/133A of the Income-tax Act (“the Act” for short) was conducted by the Investigation Wing of the department on 20.06.2014 in M/s. Alchemist Group of cases; that a notice u/s.153A was issued; that the assessee filed return of income