← 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

Meera Yadav, Jhansi vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, ITA No. 359, 394 and 360/Agr/2025 are allowed for

ITA 360/AGR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37

360/Agr/2025 processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on information received from Investigation Wing that the assessee had made unexplained investment of Rs.53,84,984/- in immovable property during the period 2013 to 2018 (five consecutive years), proceedings u/s. 147 were initiated and notice

Meera Yadav, Jhansi vs. DCIT, Circle2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, ITA No. 359, 394 and 360/Agr/2025 are allowed for

ITA 359/AGR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 37

360/Agr/2025 processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on information received from Investigation Wing that the assessee had made unexplained investment of Rs.53,84,984/- in immovable property during the period 2013 to 2018 (five consecutive years), proceedings u/s. 147 were initiated and notice

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Vapi vs. Gujarat Polysol Chemicals Limited, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 64/SRT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 250

Department at the office and factory premises of assessee on 18.11.2021. During the search action various documents and digital data were seized by Investigation Wing on the ground that such documents contain incriminating evidence about the inflated / bogus purchase, in fact, at the time of search no major discrepancy

Ravi Rambabu, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 651/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 651/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Ravi Rambabu, Vs. Assistant Commissioner Hyderabad. Of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Pan: Abspr3702P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Rectification Order Dated 28.03.2025 Passed By The Cit (Appeals) Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act"), Dated 28.03.2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Disposing Of The Assessee’S Appeal, Vide His Order Dated 29.01.2025. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order Passed By The Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 153CSection 154Section 68Section 69Section 69A

additional income that was offered by him in his “affidavit”, dated 17.01.2020. 6. In the meantime, the seized material was handed over by the Investigation Wing to the AO on 01.09.2020. Thereafter, in response to the “satisfaction note” recorded under Section 153C(2)(b) of the Act, the AO issued ... Skill Promoters group was 22.10.2019. Search was concluded on 20.12.2019. It was observed by him that the seized material was handed over by the Investigation Wing to the AO on 01.09.2020. Further, the “satisfaction note” under Section 153C(2)(b) was recorded, and the notice was issued

DCIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Chandra Financial Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5022/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawala.Ys: 2009-10

Section 250Section 68

appellant could not substantiate its claim in absence of substantial proof. The data in case of the appellant was mapped and analysed by the investigation wing as well as the AO. On perusal of the records it is concluded that the appellant has entered into the said transaction ... gone through the same, we found that assessee itself has not claimed the impugned loss. But the date was mapped and analysed by the investigation wing and also by AO, which goes to show that assessee had entered into the said transaction as a modified client and shifted the profit

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Developers Private Limited, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 4687/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Developers Private Limited, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 4675/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Developers Private Limited, Navi Mumbai

ITA 4594/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 68

deleting the addition of Rs.12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Developers Private Limited, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 4593/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Kalpana Struct Con, Thane

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 4568/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Realty LLP, Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 4346/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 3(2), Mumbai vs. Greenscape Realty LLP, Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 4285/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

ACIT Central Circle 8(3), Mumbai vs. Vivah Classique, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4050/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15
Section 133ASection 143(3)

nIncome-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on 27/12/2016, accepting\nthe returned income.\n\n2.2 Subsequently, the Assessing Officer received information from\nthe Investigation Wing of the Income-tax Department, Mumbai,\nwhich revealed that, pursuant to inquiries conducted by the\nSecurities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and survey ... Officer\nfurnish copies of the information, materials, and evidences relied\nupon for initiating the reassessment proceedings, including the\ndetails and findings gathered by the Investigation Wing, Mumbai.\nHowever, no such information or material was provided to the\nassessee despite specific requests.\n\n5.2 The assessee also objected to what

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 3 2 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Greenscape Developers Pvt Limited, Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the Revenue in respect of the three assessees are dismissed

ITA 3698/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain and Prateek Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 133ASection 68

addition of Rs. 12,00,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was made based on the credible information received from investigation wing. 2. On the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the assessee had discharged its burden under section 68 despite ... lender entities. 3. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate the findings of the investigation wing wherein the statement of the principal person of the group, Shri Pravin kumar Jain was recorded in which he categorically admitted that the entire

Vijaya Prakash Nagori, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 32(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3392/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Om Prakash Kantvijaya Prakash Nagori Vs. Ito, Ward, 32(2)(1) 409/C, Abhar Jp Road, Kautilya Bhawan, C-41- Seven Bungalows, Andhere 43, Avenue, 3, Near (W), Mumbai – 400 061. Videsh Bhavan, G Block Bkc Pan/Gir No. Aekpr2943H (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 263oSection 68

under. “With regard to query for providing of Statement of third person, it is informed that the statements and others material held with the Investigation Wing were only used as secondary material to show that the assessee has routed its unaccounted money through companies which were found to be involved ... that long term capital Gain earned by assessee was bogus for reason that there was an unusual rise in price of script and further investigation wing had investigated trading of this company and found that accommodation entry providers were rigging price - Accordingly, he made addition under section 68 - Whether since

Vishwas Shashikant Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1399/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

relied upon the such erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the such erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of statement of director ... view of information received from the DGIT in view of information received from the DGIT in view of information received from the DGIT Investigation Wing, Lucknow Investigation Wing, Lucknow, which is undisputedly was not found which is undisputedly was not found during the course of the search action

Gautam Ashok Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1398/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

relied upon the such erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the such erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of statement of director ... view of information received from the DGIT in view of information received from the DGIT in view of information received from the DGIT Investigation Wing, Lucknow Investigation Wing, Lucknow, which is undisputedly was not found which is undisputedly was not found during the course of the search action

Gaurav Abhay Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1397/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

relied upon the such erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the such erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of information received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of statement of director ... view of information received from the DGIT in view of information received from the DGIT in view of information received from the DGIT Investigation Wing, Lucknow Investigation Wing, Lucknow, which is undisputedly was not found which is undisputedly was not found during the course of the search action

Vikram Sajanlal Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1391/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 153A

made any independent enquiry before making\nsuch erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the\ninformation received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of\nstatement of director of PMC Fin Corp Ltd and orders passed by\nSEBI, therefore addition be deleted.\n3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that

Tanu Gautam Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1345/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Section 153A

made any independent enquiry before making\nsuch erroneous addition and has merely relied upon the\ninformation received from Investigation Wing Lucknow, copies of\nstatement of director of PMC Fin Corp Ltd and orders passed by\nSEBI, therefore addition be deleted.\n\n3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case