← 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

Mr. Ganpathraj & Sons, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 10 (2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2520/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2520/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Ganpathraj & Sons, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.30, Market Street, Perambur, Non-Corporate Ward-10(2), Chennai – 600 029. Chennai. [Pan: Aaahj 2810H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ar V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. Jayaraman:

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 68

have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. Admittedly, the A.O received information from Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata with regard to investment of the assessee in penny stock company, namely, M/s. Concrete Credit Limited. The assessee also admittedly sold ... penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters

Mr. Ashok Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 10 (1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2518/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2518/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri J. Ashok Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.30, Market Street, Perambur, Non-Corporate Ward-10(2), Chennai – 600 029. Chennai. [Pan: Aabpa 8435C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ar V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29 .11.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. Jayaraman:

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. Admittedly, the A.O received information from Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata with regard to investment of the assessee in penny stock company, namely, M/s. Concrete Credit Limited. The assessee also admittedly sold ... penny stock company. From the material available on record it appears that a copy of information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. It is not brought on record the relationship of the assessee with the promoters

DCIT - CC - 4 (1), Cr- 4, Pr. CIT- (C)-2, Mumbai vs. Pkss Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5803/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Waseem Ahmed, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5680/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5681/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) Pkss Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of 142, Garuda House, Upper Income Tax, Cc-4(1), 19 Th बनाम/ Govind Nagar Malad (East), Floor, Air India Bldg., Vs. Mumbai-400 097 Mumbai-400 021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaecp6450A आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5803/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5802/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of Pkss Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Cc-4(1), 19 Th 142, Garuda House, Upper बनाम/ Floor, Air India Bldg., Govind Nagar Malad (East), Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 097 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, Ms. Mitali Gopani, Ars प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Awungshi Gimson, Dr ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154

Department was conducted under section 132 of the Act on the assessee on 27.02.2014. This search was a result of search conducted by Investigation Wing on Shri Pravin Kumar Jain on 01.10.2013. The said search action on Pravin Kumar Jain of cases revealed that these concerns controlled directly or indirectly ... share capital. The learned Counsel for the assessee before us filed paper book wherein he has filed copy of reply to the DDIT investigation, wing 1(1) dated 15.05.2014 stating that the relevant share certificates were produced before the DDIT investigation Wing by the assessee and the relevant reply read

DCIT - CC - 4 (1), Cr- 4, Pr. CIT- (C)-2, Mumbai vs. Pkss Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5802/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Waseem Ahmed, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5680/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5681/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) Pkss Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of 142, Garuda House, Upper Income Tax, Cc-4(1), 19 Th बनाम/ Govind Nagar Malad (East), Floor, Air India Bldg., Vs. Mumbai-400 097 Mumbai-400 021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaecp6450A आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5803/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2009-10) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 5802/Mum/2018 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of Pkss Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, Cc-4(1), 19 Th 142, Garuda House, Upper बनाम/ Floor, Air India Bldg., Govind Nagar Malad (East), Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 097 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah, Ms. Mitali Gopani, Ars प्रत्यर्थी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Awungshi Gimson, Dr ुिवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.11.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimson, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154

Department was conducted under section 132 of the Act on the assessee on 27.02.2014. This search was a result of search conducted by Investigation Wing on Shri Pravin Kumar Jain on 01.10.2013. The said search action on Pravin Kumar Jain of cases revealed that these concerns controlled directly or indirectly ... share capital. The learned Counsel for the assessee before us filed paper book wherein he has filed copy of reply to the DDIT investigation, wing 1(1) dated 15.05.2014 stating that the relevant share certificates were produced before the DDIT investigation Wing by the assessee and the relevant reply read