“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

Dlf Universal Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 293/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

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 292/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

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

Shri Surender Kumar Rastogi, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2523/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Vijay Kumar Chadha, Senior DR

Section 143Section 147Section 148

upholding the. assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 147 of the I T Act based on mere information passed on by the Investigation Wing of the Department with the no supporting 2 ITA No.2519/Del./2016 material so as to allow the AO to independently apply his mind on such

Prime Comfort Products P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 267/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: S/Shri Raj Kumar & Sumit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr.D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 68

source of money given to the assessee company. Here it is not case of any accommodation entry provider nor there is any report of investigation wing nor has any inquiry been conducted by the Assessing Officer to allay or rebut the evidences filed by the assessee company

Akarsh Steels Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 218/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Abhishek Sharma (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

Subsequently, the AO reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act on 14.05.2015 based on the information received from Investigation Wing, Mumbai. The ld. A/R has referred to the reasons recorded by the AO and submitted that the AO has made the averments which ... alleged accommodation entries on account of share premium. The ld. A/R has further submitted that the AO has referred to report of the Investigation Wing but has not pointed out even the correct amount of the share premium received by the assessee on issue of shares to various concerns

DCIT Circle-1, Thane vs. M/S.Asian Hardware and Tools, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5332/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari (DR)For Respondent: None

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

with the remark “Left”. The assessee was asked to produce the party and substantiate the purchases. The Assessing Officer after considering the report of Investigation Wing of Sale Tax Department disallowed the entire purchases shown from Sachi Mercantile Pvt Ltd. in assessment order dated 31.10.2014 passed under section ... perused the material available on record. 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

Mr.Vishal Amarshi Gala, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 28(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is partly allowed

ITA 5324/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhmr. Vishal Amarshi Gala Ito Ward-28(3)(4), 3Rd Floor, Tower No6, C/O Gautam Marketing, Plot No.42, Sector-19A, Opp. Vs. Vashi Railway Station Complex, Apmc, Opp To Manu Motors, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400703. Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400703. Pan: Aegpg1475B Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Miss. Hiral D. Sajpal (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Akhytar H. Ansari (Dr)

For Appellant: Miss. Hiral D. Sajpal (AR)For Respondent: Shri Akhytar H. Ansari (DR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

with the remark “Left”. The assessee was asked to produce the party and substantiate the purchases. The Assessing Officer after considering the report of Investigation Wing of Sale Tax Department disallowed the 12.5% of the purchases shown from following four parties in assessment order dated 19.03.2015 passed under section ... 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 actual delivery of goods

ITO -WD- 3(3), Kalyan vs. Kapil D. Mehta, Dombivali

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 5101/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5101/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) Income Tax Officer-Ward-3(3) Kalyan Shri Kapil D. Mehta 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion M/S. Shree Ram Sales Corporation बनाम/ Murbad Road, Kalyan (W)-421 301. C/O. Tex Mech Industries 08, Shree Parswanath Indl. Estate Vs. V.P.Road, Near Janki Hotel Dombivili (East) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Alipm-0564-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4985/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4986/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) Shri Kapil D. Mehta Income Tax Officer-Ward-3(3) Kalyan 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion M/S. Shree Ram Sales Corporation बनाम/ C/O. Tex Mech Industries Murbad Road, Kalyan (W)-421 301. 08, Shree Parswanath Indl. Estate Vs. V.P.Road, Near Janki Hotel Dombivili (East) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Alipm-0564-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Kumar-Ld.Dr Assessee By : Shri Haresh Joshi-Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/09/2019 Date Of Hearing

For Appellant: Shri Haresh Joshi-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar-Ld.DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

returned income of Rs.5.33 Lacs filed by the assessee on 29/09/2009 which was processed u/s.143(1). 2.2 Pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing / Sales tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, it transpired that the assessee stood beneficiary of alleged bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.6.70 Lacs from

ITO - WD- 3(3), Kalyan vs. Milan Natwarlal Bhayani, Dombivali

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5100/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5100/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) Income Tax Officer-Ward-3(3),Kalyan Shri Milan Natwarlal Bhayani 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion बनाम/ 19, Parigandha Apartment Murbad Road, Kalyan (W)-421 301. Manpada Road. Near Navjivan Hospital Vs. Dombivali (E)-421 201. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aawpb 0699 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : S/Shri Akhtar H. Ansari & Saurabh Kumar-Ld.Drs Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain-Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/09/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain-Ld. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Akhtar H. Ansari and Saurabh Kumar-Ld.DRs

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

23/09/2009 which was processed u/s.143(1). 3 Shri Milan Natwarlal Bhayani Assessment Year 2009-10 2.2 Pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing / Sales tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, it transpired that the assessee stood beneficiary of alleged bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.8.40 Lacs from

ITO, WD - 3(3), Kalyan vs. Mukesh Dipchand, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5098/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5098/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5099/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2011-12) Income Tax Officer- Ward-3(3)-Kalyan Shri Mukesh Dipchand Doshi 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion बनाम/ 201, Raj Darshan Murbad Road, Kalyan (W)-421 301. Sarvodaya Nagar Vs. Mulund West, Mumbai-400 080. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpd 8994 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari-Ld.Dr Assessee By : Ms. Lajari Oswal-Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/09/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Ms. Lajari Oswal-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari-Ld.DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148

income of Rs.2.22 Lacs filed by the assessee on 25/09/2009 which was processed u/s.143(1). 2.2 Pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing / Sales tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, it transpired that the assessee stood beneficiary of alleged bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.7.75 Lacs from

ACIT -Circle- 3, Kalyan vs. Mahendra Nandkishore Shah, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5096/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5096/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5097/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2011-12) Acit-Circle-3 (Kalyan) Shri Mahendra Nandkishore Shah 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion बनाम/ Prop. Of M/S. Shah Engineers Murbad Road, Kalyan (W)-421 301. B-402, Vinit Sadan, Rajaji Path Vs. Dombivli (E)-421 201. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acsps 3049 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari-Ld.Dr Assessee By : Shri M. Subramanian-Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 18/09/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari-Ld.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

income of Rs.18.97 Lacs e-filed by the assessee on 21/09/2010 which was processed u/s.143(1). 2.2 Pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing / Sales tax Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, it transpired that the assessee stood beneficiary of alleged bogus purchases to the tune of Rs.16.99 Lacs from

Sterling Jewels Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 5(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2009-10 is dismissed

ITA 6154/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negiita No.6154, 6155, 6156, 6157 & 6158/Mum/2016 (Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14) Sterling Jewels Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Acit-5(3)(2) 208, A-Z Industrial Estate 460, Aaykar Bhawan Ganpatrao Kadam Marg M.K.Road, Churchgate Lower Parel (W) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aajcs3316D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69C

erred in upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings u/s. 147, which is resorted to merely on the basis of information received from the Investigation wing of the Department and without verification of facts and without application of mind by the learned AO to the case or having ... entry operators and appellant company was one of the beneficiaries from the accommodation bills supplied by them. Bhanwarlal Jain group has confessed before the investigation wing of the Department in the statements taken under oath that they have not supplied any material except supplying the accommodation invoices. As the reassessment

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Jk International, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue is dismissed with

ITA 716/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar,, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta, (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10ASection 115BSection 36(1)(va)Section 69C

observation in respect of the issue as under:- Facts as summarized from the order of AO. ’’3. The AO had information from the investigation wing Mumbai that there are certain entities controlled by Shri Rajendra Jain who are providing bogus bills of purchases. As per the information, no actual goods ... were transacted from the said parties. A statement was recorded by the Investigation Wing which is reproduced by the AO in the order3. In this statement Shri Rajendra Jain explained the modus operandi and listed name of those concerns (Proprietorship, firms and Ltd. companies) engaged in providing the accommodation entries

Dhanalaxmi Jewellers, Angul vs. ITO, Angul Ward, Angul

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms as indicated above

ITA 153/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.153/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) M/S Dhanalaxmi Jewellers, Vs. Ito, Angul Ward, Angul Laxmi Bazar, Angul-759122 स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Aagfd 8791 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri D.K.Sheth/M. Sheth, Advs. िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta, Dr

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sheth/M. Sheth, AdvsFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 68

assessee to his office for recording his statement on any of the issues relevant to the assessment. On the other hand, officers of the investigation wing can exercise these powers even if no proceedings are pending with them. They can invoke this section during the course of a search

ITO, Ward - 31(1), Kolkata vs. Kaushik Das, Kiolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue ( in ITA No

ITA 1678/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.) Asstt. Year : 200708 I.T.O., Ward 31(1), Kolkata Vs Kaushik Das Pan: Aixpd0929L ( Department ) (Respondent) C.O No. 100/Kol/2017 [Ita No. 1678/Kol/2017 A.Y : 200708] Kaushik Das Vs I.T.O., Ward 31(1), Kolkata Pan: Aixpd0929L ( Cross Objector ) ( Department )

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: S/Shri A.K. Nayak, CIT &

Section 133(6)Section 144

2007 08 on 03122007, declaring total income of Rs.1,34,470/. Later on, an information was received by assessing officer from investigation wing of the Department, vide letter of DDIT(Inv), Unit 1(1), Kolkata bearing no. DDIT(Inv)/Unit 1(1)/Kol0809, dated 21/01/2009. The DDIT (Inv), Unit ... find mention in the status report so sent by the AO along with the remand report. The status report given by the investigation wing very clearly mentions that such bank accounts have been used for the purpose of providing accommodation entry to various companies so mentioned in remand report

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. Harish Bagla, Kolkata

In the result, the I.T. Appeal in ITA No

ITA 2303/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) I.T.A. No. 2302/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & I.T.A. No. 2303/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-2(1), Kolkata…………….................………..…….......Appellant Vs. Harish Bagla…………………………......................................................................................…………Respondent Jaisalmer Building 6, Ashoka Road Kolkata – 700 027 [Pan : Abppb 7430 D] Appearances By: Shri D.S. Damle, Fca & Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit, D/R Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 8Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 1St , 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271A

search, no piece of corroborative evidence was either found during the search nor brought on record by further post search investigation either by the investigation wing officer or by the AO during the assessment proceeding. Therefore the total addition of Rs.35270734/ - cannot be sustained only on the basis ... offered for taxation by the assessee suomoto in order to buy peace of mind. I also .find that neither the officers in the investigation wing in the post search investigation nor the Assessing Officer during assessment process found any discriminating evidence of undisclosed income other than the statement

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Kolkata vs. Harish Bagla, Kolkata

In the result, the I.T. Appeal in ITA No

ITA 2302/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271A

Praveen Kumar Surana, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-10(3), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 605/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.604 & 605/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Praveen Kumar Surana, The Income Tax Officer, No.16, Trust Square Street, V. Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Ramalingapuram, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 012. Pan : Aagpp 9842 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanath Kumar Raha, JCIT

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 4 I.T.A. Nos.604 & 605/Chny/19 by the assessees in the penny stock company

Praveen Kumar Surana, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-10(3), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 604/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

For Respondent: Shri Sanath Kumar Raha, JCIT

Section 10(38)

Rajkumari Agarwal, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward -10(5), Chennai

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

ITA 202/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.202/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Rajkumari Agarwal, The Income Tax Officer, 5B, Manonmani Ammal Road, V. Non Corporate Ward - 10(5), Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Arwpr 3673 B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Padmanabhan, CAFor Respondent: Shri K. Hari Govind, JCIT

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