← 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

ACIT Circle 22(1), Mumbai vs. Bharoomal & Co, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5356/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaacit,Circle-22(1) Vs. Bharoomal & Co. Room No.322, 3Rd Floor 1 & 2, Narsing Co-Op. Soc. 4Th Road, Khar (West) Income Tax Office Piramal Chambers,Lalbaug Mumbai-400 052 Parel, Mumbai-400 012

Section 143(3)Section 147

also failed to take the investigation to a logical conclusion by carry out necessary enquires, but he solely relied upon information received from investigation wing, which was further supported by information received from Maharashtra Sales Tax Department. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to accept arguments of both the sides

Nalanda Securities Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 13(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2770/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2770/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) Nalanda Securities Private Limited Dcit-13(1)(1) 9, 2Nd Floor, Roseland Building बनाम/ Income Tax Office, 2Nd Floor 108 Water Field Road, Bandra (W) Aaykar Bhavan, Churchgate Vs. Mumbai-400 050 Mumbai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcn 1045 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rahul Hakani-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri K. Madhusudan – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 03/10/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 14/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Hakani-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

that the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated against the assessee since Ld. AO was clinched with tangible material in the shape of information from investigation wing which suggested possible escapement of income in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AO, after appreciating the data supplied by investigation wing, reopened ... code modification was provided by the stock exchanges / SEBI with a view to rectify the human error. No nexus of the data obtained from investigation wing could be established with the transactions, if any, carried out by the assessee, with the said broker. Therefore, the allegations

Preeti Bansal, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-40(5), New Delhi

In the result ITA number 1665/del/2019 filed in the case of Mrs

ITA 1665/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charypreeti Bansal, Vs. Ito, Y-402, Sidhartha Apartments, Ward-40(5), Maharana Pratap Enclave, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi Pan: Agjpg2525K (Appellant) (Respondent) Shruti Garg, Vs. Ito, 2820/209, Tri Nagar, New Delhi Ward-42(4), Pan: Asrpg9207C New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Chand Kumar Goyal (Huf), Vs. Ito, H No. 119, Anand Vihar, Ward-40(3), Pitampura, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabhc7853C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA
Section 133Section 133ASection 147

National Multi commodity exchange were used to set off any income/profit available in the books. On perusal of the investigation report of the investigation wing , Calcutta, it was observed that summons returned unserved as the entities were not found at the addresses, the entities did not file income tax return

Chand Kumar Goyal (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 40(3), New Delhi

In the result ITA number 1665/del/2019 filed in the case of Mrs

ITA 1667/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charypreeti Bansal, Vs. Ito, Y-402, Sidhartha Apartments, Ward-40(5), Maharana Pratap Enclave, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi Pan: Agjpg2525K (Appellant) (Respondent) Shruti Garg, Vs. Ito, 2820/209, Tri Nagar, New Delhi Ward-42(4), Pan: Asrpg9207C New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Chand Kumar Goyal (Huf), Vs. Ito, H No. 119, Anand Vihar, Ward-40(3), Pitampura, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabhc7853C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA
Section 133Section 133ASection 147

National Multi commodity exchange were used to set off any income/profit available in the books. On perusal of the investigation report of the investigation wing , Calcutta, it was observed that summons returned unserved as the entities were not found at the addresses, the entities did not file income tax return

Shruti Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-42(4), New Delhi

In the result ITA number 1665/del/2019 filed in the case of Mrs

ITA 1666/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charypreeti Bansal, Vs. Ito, Y-402, Sidhartha Apartments, Ward-40(5), Maharana Pratap Enclave, New Delhi Pitampura, New Delhi Pan: Agjpg2525K (Appellant) (Respondent) Shruti Garg, Vs. Ito, 2820/209, Tri Nagar, New Delhi Ward-42(4), Pan: Asrpg9207C New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Chand Kumar Goyal (Huf), Vs. Ito, H No. 119, Anand Vihar, Ward-40(3), Pitampura, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabhc7853C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Mansi Jain, CA
Section 133Section 133ASection 147

National Multi commodity exchange were used to set off any income/profit available in the books. On perusal of the investigation report of the investigation wing , Calcutta, it was observed that summons returned unserved as the entities were not found at the addresses, the entities did not file income tax return

Suman Gutgutia, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward 10(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 136/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri K. BalasubramanianFor Respondent: Ms.G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni
Section 10(38)

assessee involved in inflating the shares of the company. Moreover, the copy of the investigation report said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. On identical circumstances, this Tribunal in the case of Kanhaiyalal & Sons ... Representative also. Admittedly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessees on the basis of the information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata with regard to investment made by the assessees in the penny stock company. It is not in dispute that

Suchita Raju Mehta, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward -10(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 135/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri K. BalasubramanianFor Respondent: Ms.G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni
Section 10(38)

assessee involved in inflating the shares of the company. Moreover, the copy of the investigation report said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. On identical circumstances, this Tribunal in the case of Kanhaiyalal & Sons ... Representative also. Admittedly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessees on the basis of the information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata with regard to investment made by the assessees in the penny stock company. It is not in dispute that

Sureshkumar(HUF), Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward 10(4), Chennai

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

ITA 134/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.134/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K. BalasubramanianFor Respondent: Ms.G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni
Section 10(38)Section 2

assessee involved in inflating the shares of the company. Moreover, the copy of the investigation report said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata was not furnished to the assessee. On identical circumstances, this Tribunal in the case of Kanhaiyalal & Sons ... Representative also. Admittedly, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessees on the basis of the information said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata with regard to investment made by the assessees in the penny stock company. It is not in dispute that

Bipin Mangalji Sanghvi, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 4115/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 148

ferrous metals and electronic goods. The assessee filed ROI declaring income at on 24/08/2009. The AO received 2 Bipin Mangalji Sanghvi information from the Investigation Wing that the assessee has entered into bogus purchase transactions with 20 parties totaling to Rs. 1,56,26,375/-. After recording reasons, the assessment

M/S. Hillman Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 6530/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. D.R
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148

from the information received from the DIT (Inv.), it was noticed that the Directors of the above accommodation entry provider Companies had admitted before Investigation Wing that the said companies were utilised for providing accommodation entries. The A.O. in view of the above facts and looking to the non- cooperation ... During the year under consideration, assessee has also made the investment in a new property of Rs.46,95,000/-. The information sent by the Investigation Wing suggest that there is transaction of Rs.25,00,000/- as mentioned above, is accommodation entry only. Accordingly the amount of Rs.25

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ten Constructions (India) Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4911/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodacit-15(3)(1) Vs. Ten Constructions (India) 4Th Floor, Room No.451 Private Limited, 3Rd Floor, Shop No. J-219, Aaykar Bhavan, M K Road Mumbai-400020 Tower No. 5, Vashi Railway Station, Navi Mumbai-400705

Section 143(3)Section 147

also failed to take the investigation to a logical conclusion by carrying out necessary enquires, but he solely relied upon information received from investigation wing, which was further supported by information received from Maharashtra Sales Tax Department. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to accept arguments of both the sides

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Landcraft Developers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 461/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R. K. Panda & Sh. Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit Landcraft Developers Pvt. Ltd., 309, 3Rd Floor, Plot Central Circle-18 Vs New Delhi No.13, Parmesh Corporate Towers Community Centre, Karkardooma, Delhi-110092 Pan No.Aabcl1391F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. Raj Kumar, Ca Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 10/10/2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.11.2015 Of The Cit(A)-29, New Delhi Relating To A. Y. 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2011 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,87,82,139/- (Wrongly Mentioned By The Ao As 15.10.2010). A Search & Seizure Operation U/S. 132 Of The It Act Was Carried Out On 23.08.2012 In M/S. Land Craft Group Of Cases. The Case Of The Assessee Was Also Covered U/S. 132 (1)

Section 132Section 153Section 68

source of source have also confirmed to have provided loans alongwith their credence such as PAN, ROI etc. The investigation made by investigation wing has also not come out with any adverse findings. Therefore, the onus on the appellant has been duly discharged to prove the creditworthiness and genuineness ... were issued to both the parties who had replied to the same. Further enquiry was conducted u/s. 131 /133 (6) directly by the Investigation Wing Delhi and Investigation Wing at Kanpur. During the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer had also issued notice u/s. 133 (6) to M/s. Raffle

Manjit Singh Gahlot, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 43(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 1535/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhumanjit Singh Gahlot, Vs. Ito, Ward 43(5), A-1/18, Dwarka Mor, Metro New Delhi Station, Sewak Park, Najafgarh Road, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi – 59 (Pan: Aakpg1155C) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 234C

Appellant Authority / AO has erred both on facts and in law in making the said addition solely relying on the information received from the investigation wing. 13. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the addition made by the learned AO is untenable in the eye of law having

Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(5), Katra vs. Sh. Chain Singh, Katra

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 635/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. B.R. Baskaran & Sh. N.K.Choudhryassessment Year:2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Amar Pal Meena (Ld. DR)For Respondent: Sh. Joginder Singh (Ld. CA)
Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

assessment in this case was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act on the basis of the investigation report received from the Investigation Wing of the department. This has already been admitted by the AO in his reply to the objections raised by the assessee in the beginning ... acted on his own and has reopened the assessment simply on the basis of the Investigation report received from the Investigation wing of the department and the direction obtained from Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu. On the basis of these facts, it cannot be said that the "reason

P.Kantilal & Co., Mumbai vs. ITO - 19 (2)(5), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5372/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Neelam C. Jadhav (AR)For Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari (Sr. DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

other hand, 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 actual delivery

ITO - WD- 22 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. Deepak Navnitlal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 5358/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhito 22(1)(2) Shri Deepak Navnitlal Shah Room No. 313, Piramal (Prop. Of M/S Rajdeep Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. Traders 2, Maheshwar Kunj, Mumbai-400012 Saraswati Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai- 400054. Pan: Aaeps9982R Appellant Respondent Shri Deepak Navnitlal Shah Ito 22(1)(2) (Prop. Of M/S Rajdeep Room No. 313, Piramal Traders 2, Maheshwar Kunj, Vs. Chambers, Lalbaug, Saraswati Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400012 Mumbai- 400054. Pan: Aaeps9982R

For Appellant: Shri Akhtar A. Ansari (DR)For Respondent: Shri Haresh Purushottamdas Shah
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 254(1)

purchases. 9. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of Assessing Officer. 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 ... alleged bogus purchases. The Assessing Officer has not disputed the sales of the assessee. The Assessing Officer solely relied upon the report of Investigation Wing of Sale Tax Department. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee urged that the purchases shown by assessee are genuine. The payments of purchases were

Mukesh Chand Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-49(3), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 794/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaassessment Year: 2009-10 Mukesh Chand Garg Ito B-1/305, Ground Floor, Janak Vs Ward- 49 (3) Puri, New Delhi-110058 New Delhi Pan No.Aeypg7826A (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148

Assessing Officer in the instant case has not applied his mind and initiated action u/s. 147 on the basis of report of the investigation wing Therefore, the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable. 6. So far as the merit of the case is concerned ... authorities below. I have also considered the various decisions cited before me. I find the Assessing Officer, on the basis of report of the investigation wing of the department, reopened the assessment and made addition of Rs.4,39,342/- on account of client code modification through broker which has been

Reeshu Goel, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 34(4), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1691/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Patwari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr.D.R
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

kept on rising which proves that prices were rigged in the stock exchange through manipulation. Further, various brokers whose statements were recorded by the Investigation Wing, it was found that the shares of the CCL International were facilitated for providing bogus entry to various persons. After detailed discussion and discussing ... months and Assessing Officer has discussed in detail how the price in the stock exchange was rigged solely to benefit the beneficiaries when investigation wing after detailed inquiry have found from various broker that they have provided accommodation entry to various persons in this scrip, then strong presumption goes that

Dlf Universal Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 295/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 292/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 293/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 294/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 295/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dlf Universal Ltd., Vs Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Circle-1(1), Arjun Marg, Dlf City, Gurgaon (Haryana) Phase-1, Gurgaon (Haryana) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj1655P Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.10.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 139Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153A

that a search & seizure action was carried out in the case of M/s Orris Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. group of cases on 16.01.2013 by Investigation Wing. During the course of search, a warrant of authorization was issued on 30.01.2013 u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect

Dlf Universal Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 294/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 292/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 293/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Ita No. 294/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 295/Del./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dlf Universal Ltd., Vs Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Circle-1(1), Arjun Marg, Dlf City, Gurgaon (Haryana) Phase-1, Gurgaon (Haryana) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj1655P Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.10.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132ASection 139Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153A

that a search & seizure action was carried out in the case of M/s Orris Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. group of cases on 16.01.2013 by Investigation Wing. During the course of search, a warrant of authorization was issued on 30.01.2013 u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect