“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

Extent D Services, Hooghly vs. ACIT, Circle - 24(1), Hooghly

Appeal is allowed

ITA 2668/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं/I.T.A No.2668/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Extent D Services Vs. Acit, Circle-24(1), Kolkata. 1032, Rue-De-Corderie, Burabazar, Chandannagar, Hooghly. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacfe6516B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. & S.L. Kochar, Adv. Respondent By : Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 29/01/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 6, Kolkata’S Order Dated 27.09.2018 Passed In Case No.Cit(A), Kol-6/10221/2016-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Persued. 2. The Assessee’S Delay Of 18 Days In Filing Of The Instant Appeal Stated To Be Attributable To Communication Gap & Compilation Of Necessary Records Is Condoned On Account Of No Objection From Revenue Side. 3. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance On Merits Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Disallowing/Adding Its Section 35(1)(Ii) Deduction Claim Of Rs.33,00,000/- Qua Contribution Made To M/S School Of Human Genetics

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. & S.L. Kochar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, JCIT

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(ii)

deduction claimed by the assessee was denied by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the allegations contained in the report of the Investigation Wing of Kolkata that the said donations were bogus. The reasons stated therein, in short, were that statements of some key persons of these two donee ... various amounts donated to these two institutions. We note that in the statements, of key persons and alleged brokers recorded by the Investigation Wing in course of survey proceedings, in their cases and the extracts of which was provided to the assessee in the show cause notice, the name

ACIT 25(2), Mumbai vs. H.K. Pujara Builders, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2008-

ITA 5307/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Acit – 25(2), M/S H.K. Pujara Builders, R. No. 508, C-10, 5Th Floor, 11, Swastik Plaza, V.L. Marg, Pratyaksha Kar Bhavan, Juhu Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai - 400049 Bandra (E), Pan: Aaafh7230H Mumbai - 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Sachchidanand Dube (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jotwani (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/02/2020

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jotwani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube (DR)

Section 143Section 68

Mumbai, that during the course of search in the case of Shri Pravin Jain by the 3 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Investigation Wing, Mumbai, it came to the light that Pravin Jain was engaged in providing bogus accommodation entries and during the year relevant to the assessment year under consideration ... 557/DEL/2010) wherein the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue appeal by holding that the Assessing Officer has primarily relied upon the Report of the Investigation wing which cannot conclusively prove that assessee’s own money was invested in the form of share application money. 4 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Further

M/S. Home Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 4957/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4957/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2006-07 बनाम M/S Home Developers Pvt. Ltd. Acit D-22, Defence Colony, Vs. Central Circle-14, New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 153ASection 68

income of Rs. 11,59,39,654/- on 31.12.2007. Thereafter, on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing with reference to beneficiary of accommodation Home Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT/ I.T.A.No.4957/Del/2015/A.Y.2006-07 Page 3 of 8 entries received from certain entry operators identified by the Investigation Wing

Parasben Kasturchand Kochar, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(5), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 549/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad)

For Appellant: Shri P.D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goyal, Sr. D.R

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 68

Facts of the case are that the assessee in the business of trading in share and also earning income from interest etc. The Investigation Wing of the department notice suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on shares of Alpha Graphic India Ltd. where assessee has sold ... sale of different shares including the shares of the above two companies. 3. The assessing officer after receiving information from the Investigation Wing issued notice to the assessee alleging that assessee has carried out on bogus penny stock and booking of bogus LTCG. 4. In response to the notice, assessee

Arina Grover, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-45(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 9316/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Arina Grover, Vs. Acit, Circle 45(1), D-25, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi Ajay Enclave, New Delhi – 110 027 (Pan: Akepg0821F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Tiwari, Advocate & Sh. VinayFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr.DR

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessment in that case were more or less similar to the reasons in the present case, viz., information was received from the Investigation Wing regarding accommodation entries provided by a 'known' accommodation entry provider. There, on facts, the Court came to the conclusion that the reasons were, in fact ... material and the formation of the reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment. In the present case too, the information received from the Investigation Wing cannot be said to be 15 tangible material per se without a further inquiry being undertaken by the AO. In the present case

Ananya Portfolio Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1484/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ravi Pratap Mall, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

para no. 17, it is noted that the AO after examination of the documents i.e. return of income and information provided by the Investigation Wing of the Department, New Delhi and duly satisfying himself, issued notice dated 28.3.2016 u/s. 148 of the Act with the prior approval

Ananya Portfolio Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 2(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1483/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

For Appellant: Sh. Ravi Pratap Mall, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Pradeep Singh Gautam, Sr. DR

Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

M/S. Bombay Tablet Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 384/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Sadhwani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr. D.R

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 68

grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 2. Facts of the case are that the Investigation Wing of the Revenue forwarded the information that a search u/s.132 of the I.T. Act was conducted in the case of Shri Pravin Kumar Jain. The search ... issuing notice u/s. 148 of the IT Act." 3. Thereafter on the basis of the information received from the Investigation Wing, ld. A.O. issued a notice to the assessee wherein assessee stated that it has not taken any accommodation entry rather he has taken loan of Rs. 10 lacs

Ramesh Kumar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/396/2019HC Punjab & Haryana19 Feb 2020

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

declaring income of `16,36,340/- was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, there being an information from the Investigation Wing about suspicious long term capital gain on shares, the case was selected for scrutiny. Notice along with questionnaire was issued, information/documents and evidence were taken ... Income Tax Act, 1961 through CASS system of ITD for verification of suspicious long term capital gain on shares (inputs from investigation Wing). Statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 18.9.2015 was issued and served upon the assessee. Subsequent notices

Kritika Wires Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr.C.I.T.-2, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 709/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 263

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." 28. From perusal of the above, it is noted that none of the conditions prescribed in these Paras necessitating mandatory reference to TPO were

M/S. Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

ITA 1474/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1473&1474/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16) Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

made to the institution. We find that when the ld AO informed the assessee that Director of HHBRF had given some statement before the Investigation wing as per which the donation made by the assessee was to be held as a bogus transaction and assessee would be invited with consequential

M/S. Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

ITA 1473/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Karp Impex Limited, Mumbai

ITA 899/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 899/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Drop Singh Meena, DR byFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

erred in deleting the penalty levied on disallowance made on account of bogus purchases which was done on the basis of information received from investigation wing." 2. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that

ITO 27 (1)(5), Mumbai vs. Jignesh R. Kapasi, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6430/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanito 27(1)(5), Shri Jignesh R. Kapasi, Room No. 410, 4Th Floor, 1, Hansa Apartment, 126/127, Vs. Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Garodia Nagar, Ghatkopar Station Complex, Vashi, (E), Mumbai-400077. Navi Mumbai-400703. Pan: Aabpk2503R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Mrs. Samatha Mullamudi (Dr) Respondent By : Shri M.R. Tanna (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2020 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Revenue Under Section 253 Of Income-Tax Act (‘Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-

For Appellant: Mrs. Samatha Mullamudi (DR)For Respondent: Shri M.R. Tanna (AR)

Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)

payments through cheques. No evidence regarding the transportation of gods was filed. The Assessing Officer after considering the material before him and report of investigation wing and sales tax department concluded and by following the decision of Gujarat High Court in Simith P Sheth 356 ITR 451(Guj) took ... material available on record. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. DR further submits that Investigation Wing of Income- tax Department has made full-fledged investigation in respect of hawala traders. The hawala traders were/are engaged in providing bogus bill without

Siddhant Diamonds Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1102/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am M/S. Siddhant Diamonds Vs. Dy. Cit-5(3)(1), Room No.583, 5Th Floor Pvt. Ltd., Fe9011/Fc9031 Block, Aayakar Bhavan Bharat Diamond Bourse Mumbai – 400 020 Bandra Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aaecs8548Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147

made by the assessee from M/s. A2 Jewels as bogus based on the information received from Maharashtra Sales Tax Department and DGIT Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department that the said party was engaged in the business of providing accommodation bills and that no actual delivery of goods had happened

Saroj Poddar, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 14(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7508/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble[A.Ys 2015-16]

For Appellant: Smt. Prem Lata Behen, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary, CIT-DR

Section 133(6)

both of them did not care to look into the details and have simple gone by the report of the Investigation Wing Kolkata. 13. We find force in the contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee. Not only the Assessing Officer but also the first appellate authority has completely

Autoage Automobiles Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 3(4), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2099/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)

specific show cause notice was served or issued before making such additions. The contention of the A.O regarding. A. Information received from Investigation Wing: The A.O has merely relied on a letter received from investigation wing of Income Tax Department of Mr. Surender Kumar Jain and some so called accommodation

ITO.26(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Neelam Vedprakash Gupta, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 79/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanneelam Gupta, Flat No.1102, Chhadva Residency, Motibaug, Borla Village, Chembur (East), Mumbai – 400 071. Pan:Aehpg 2363R ...... Appellant

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Veer Singh

emanating from the records are : The assessee is engaged in trading of TMT Bars, steel, etc. On the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment. In re-assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer observed that assessee has made bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.1

Neelam Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO Circle-26(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 7494/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanneelam Gupta, Flat No.1102, Chhadva Residency, Motibaug, Borla Village, Chembur (East), Mumbai – 400 071. Pan:Aehpg 2363R ...... Appellant

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Veer Singh

Emco Dyestuff Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 12(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2957/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Amit PRatap Singh, D.R

Section 131Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

holding and observing as under: “4.1 I have considered the rival contentions. I have taken note of the adverse findings by the investigation Wing of Kolkata and also the statement given by Shri Arvind K. Shah, the Director of the company. As per the report of the Investigation Wing, Kolkata