← 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

A.C.I.T., Circle-6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Overtop Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 686/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 131Section 68

shell companies and the Director cum entry operator, Shri Raj Kumar Kothari has given statement u/s 131 of the Act on 02.03.2016 to the Investigation Wing of the Department that he is controlling certain numbers of companies which are engaged also in providing accommodation entries in the form of share ... Shresth Builders Pvt. Ltd. is controlled by Shri Bijay Kuman Dokania whose statement was also recorded u/s 131 of the Act by the Investigation Wing on 28.05.2014 who is also an entry provider of giving LTCG. Thereafter, the A.O has taken note of the financial of each lender company

Anjula Goel, Parwanoo vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result, both the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1174/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: S/Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.C.Chandrakanta, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 24Section 245D(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 80CSection 80T

Brief facts relating to the issue are that during assessment proceedings the AO noted that information had been received by the Investigation Wing, Chandigarh, from the Directorate of Income Tax(Investigation)-Kolkata about large scale tax evasion in the form of Bogus Long Term Capital Gain claimed by various beneficiaries ... That the amount had been received on sale of shares in the penny stock i.e M/s Cressanda Solutions Limited. The AO noted that the Investigation Wing Kolkata had carried out Survey operation u/s 133A of the Act in case of M/s Manu Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd. on 19.04.2015, wherein statement

Sunraj Diamond Exports Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Range 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 47/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Shamim Yahya, Am & Sri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, AR
Section 132

trader of cut and polished diamonds. The assessment has been framed pursuant to search action Under Section 132 of the Act conducted by investigated wing of the Department in Rajendra Jain Group. Pursuant to the information that assesee has obtained bogus purchase bills from the entities belonging to the group ... assessee to prove the genuineness of purchase especially in light of the doubts that has been raised by the enquiries conducted by the Investigation Wing, Mumbai. Such a burden has to be discharged by the assessee with very strong and clinching evidence in view of fact that, the Rajendra Jain

Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee except ITA

ITA 3131/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray
Section 132(4)

alleged date of affidavit is not relevant; the date of filing the affidavit is relevant. (d) The retraction was not filed before investigation wing which recorded the statement. It was filed before the Assessing Officer. (e) Statement in the nature of declaration is binding u/s 115 of the Indian Evidence

Nish Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC -6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee except ITA

ITA 3129/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray
Section 132(4)

alleged date of affidavit is not relevant; the date of filing the affidavit is relevant. (d) The retraction was not filed before investigation wing which recorded the statement. It was filed before the Assessing Officer. (e) Statement in the nature of declaration is binding u/s 115 of the Indian Evidence

ACIT-27(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mehta Vet Chem, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5228/MUM/2019[2010-1]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2021

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 5228/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2010-11) Acit-27(2), Room No.420, 4Th Floor, Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Station Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai -400 703 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. M/S. Mehta Vet Chem, 203,Venus Apartment, Nathpai Nagar, Ghatkopar East, Mumbai -400 077. Pan:Aaifm3834M ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms.Smita Verma
Section 37

assessment year 2010-11. 2. Ms.Smita Verma representing the Department submitted that enquiries conducted in the case of one Yogesh Dilip Waghela by the Investigation Wing it transpired that large credits were received in his bank account from various 2 आअसं. 5228/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2010-11) beneficiaries. Later

Dhanraj Himmatraf Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 19(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 5145/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan ()

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessing officer received information from the Sales-tax department, Government of Maharashtra through the Investigation Wing that certain purchases claimed to have been made during the relevant period are non genuine as the concerned selling dealer has been identified

ITO-17(1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S. Himanshu Traders, Mumbai

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 5084/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan ()

Section 143(1)

they were processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessing officer received information from the Sales-tax department through the Investigation Wing that purchases worth Rs.5,96,896/- in assessment year 2009-10 and Rs.1,59,592/- in assessment year 2012-13 are non genuine

ITO-28(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sanjay Kashiram Goyal, Mumbai

In the result, appeals are dismissed

ITA 4790/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman ()

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

course which were processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessing officer received information from the Sales-tax department through the Investigation Wing that certain purchases made by the assessee in the impugned assessment years are non-genuine, as, concerned selling dealers have been identified as hawala

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Technico Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5204/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Technico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Circle-25(1), 103, Pratap Bhawan, Cr Building, Ip Estate, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. Near Indian Express Building, New Delhi. Pan: Aaact4445P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aditya Kumar, Ca & Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Mrs Aashna Paul, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.12.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2020 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 31St March, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-9, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Sheet Metal Components & Tools & Dies. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29Th September, 2011 Declaring ‘Nil’ Income. The Said Return Was Revised On 14Th September, 2012 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.3,61,68,075/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao, On Perusal Of The Balance Sheet Filed By The Assessee, Noted That The Assessee Company Has Issued 14,72,000 Equity Shares At A Premium Of Rs.115. From The Various Details Furnished By The Assessee, The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Issued Shares To The Following Persons/Parties:-

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Mrs Aashna Paul, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)

brought any material on record to controvert the evidence filed by the assessee. There is no allegation of any enquiry by the Investigation Wing finding receipt of bogus accommodation entries in this case. Relying on various decisions, it was argued that the assessee has proved the identity, credit worthiness ... material on record to controvert the evidence filed by the appellant. In the asstt. order, there is no allegation of any inquiries by the Investigation Wing finding receipt of bogus accommodation entries in this case. If this was a case of bogus accommodation entries unearthed through enquiries by the Investigation

M/S. Marble Art, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2480/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

also on the validity of reasons recorded, therefore it was felt necessary that Department should produce not only the said report from the investigation wing but also the alleged invoices referred in the reasons as well as assessment order upon which presumption has been drawn that such cancelled invoices ... further contended that reassessment proceedings has been initiated in the case of the assessee mechanically merely on the basis of report of investigation wing and, not on independent application of mind as report of the investigation wing refer the cancelled invoices, which was not even there before the learned

M/S. Marble Art, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2479/DEL/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

also on the validity of reasons recorded, therefore it was felt necessary that Department should produce not only the said report from the investigation wing but also the alleged invoices referred in the reasons as well as assessment order upon which presumption has been drawn that such cancelled invoices ... further contended that reassessment proceedings has been initiated in the case of the assessee mechanically merely on the basis of report of investigation wing and, not on independent application of mind as report of the investigation wing refer the cancelled invoices, which was not even there before the learned

M/S. Marble Art, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2478/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

also on the validity of reasons recorded, therefore it was felt necessary that Department should produce not only the said report from the investigation wing but also the alleged invoices referred in the reasons as well as assessment order upon which presumption has been drawn that such cancelled invoices ... further contended that reassessment proceedings has been initiated in the case of the assessee mechanically merely on the basis of report of investigation wing and, not on independent application of mind as report of the investigation wing refer the cancelled invoices, which was not even there before the learned

Acs Traders (P) Ltd., Howrah vs. PCIT-5, Kolkata

ITA 467/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 263

raised share capital from dubious and shell companies and this capital raised is nothing but unaccounted cash of the group, reported by the Investigation Wing. M/s ACS Traders having PAN-AAHCA 0919 L during the FY 2011-12 relevant to the AY 2012-13 raised capital ... taken note by the Ld. PCIT to interfere/exercise his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 is that despite there being specific information from the Investigation Wing of the Department that the assessee had collected share capital plus premium from dubious source, according to him(Ld. PCIT), the AO should have lifted

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Kaizen Engineering Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 2899/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2899/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Acit-Circle-6(3)(2) M/S. Kaizen Engineering Systems Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan, Room No.576 67,Shanta Prasad, Hindu Colony Lane 01 Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Dadar, Mumbai-400 014. Pan/Gir No. Aadck-1418-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.34/Mum/2020 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 2899/Mum/2019) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Kaizen Engineering Systems Pvt. Ltd. Acit-Circle-6(3)(2) बनाम 67,Shanta Prasad, Hindu Colony Lane 01 Aaykar Bhavan, Room No.576 / Vs. Dadar, Mumbai-400 014. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Pan/Gir No. Aadck-1418-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Gurbinder Singh -Ld.Sr.DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 68Section 69C

quantum addition ignoring that the information on account of accommodation entry of bogus purchase of Rs.4,70,00,643/- is received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai of Income Tax Department; that during the search action u/s.132 of the Act carried out on 01/10/2013 in the case of Praveen Kumar Jain

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided against the assessee

ITA 1266/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

interfere with the orders of the authorities below. In these appeals reopening of the assessment have been done on account of information received from Investigation Wing that there are unexplained cash deposits in crores in the Bank accounts of the assessee. The cash deposits in the Bank accounts

Parveen Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(4), New Delhi

In the result, this issue is decided against the assessee

ITA 1265/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Singhal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

interfere with the orders of the authorities below. In these appeals reopening of the assessment have been done on account of information received from Investigation Wing that there are unexplained cash deposits in crores in the Bank accounts of the assessee. The cash deposits in the Bank accounts

DCIT-14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Patkon Construction (I) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5320/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () The Dcit-14(2)(2), M/S Patkon Construction Room No. 461, 4Th Floor, Vs. (India) Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Shivnum D, Mahtaney Park, Marine Lines, R.C. Marg, Vashi Naka, Mumbai – 400 020 Chembur, Mumbai – 400074

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

filed by the assessee was processed as such under Sec. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, on the basis of information received from the Investigation wing, Mumbai, that the assessee as a beneficiary had obtained accommodation entries of purchases, its case was reopened by the A.O under

M/S Polar Jewellery, Mumbai vs. ITO 23 (2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5002/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey ()

Section 143(1)Section 147

return of income so filed was initially processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessing officer received information from the investigation wing that in course of search and seizure operations conducted in case of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain and his group concerns

ITO 21 (1)(5), Mumbai vs. M/S Illumination Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 4971/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey ()

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147

assessee was initially processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessing officer received information from the sales-tax department through Investigation Wing that the assessee is a beneficiary of accommodation bills representing purchases worth Rs.3,27,940/- from seven parties identified as hawala operators. On the basis