← 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

The ITO, Ward-1(1)(1), Surat vs. M/S. Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1180/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.776 &1180/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vs. 1.Income Tax Officer, 1.Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., 5/A, 932, 402, Gopinath Ward 1(1) (1), Surat. Apartment, Jadakhadi, Mahidharpura, Surat.395 003. [Pan: Aaica 4525 F] 2.Income Tax Officer, 2. Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Ward 1(1) (1), Surat. 5/A, 932, 402, Gopinath Apartment, Jadakhadi, Mahidharpura, Surat 395 003. [Pan: Aaica 4525 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Suchek Anchaliya – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri J. K. Chandnani – Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 27.08.2019

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Subsequently an information was received from the Director of Investigation (Inv)-II, Mumbai that a search and survey operations were carried out by the Investigation Wing, Mumbai in the case of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain Group of Mumbai on 03.10.2013. During the year under consideration the assessee has carried out transaction ... statement of third party could not be made basis of reopening of assessment. However, the CIT (A) observed that there was credible information from Investigation Wing Mumbai regarding search and seizure action in the case of Shri Bhanwarlal M. Jain who were found engaged in providing accommodation entries. Therefore

Dcie Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S.Pali Fabrics Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 904/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negidcit, Cc-8(4) Vs. M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road 37-40 Subash Road Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent) & C.O. No. 77/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.904/Mum/2018) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S Pali Fabrics Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Cc-8(4) 5Th Floor, Sunteck Centre, Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 37-40 Subash Road Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Vile Parle(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 057 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp0089G (Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 131Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

under duress coercion. The AO, further, observed that the assessee retracted from his statement, without filing any affidavit before the investigation wing, after the completion of the survey on 15/10/2013. The assessee has not brought this fact, before the consideration of the department. Thus, he opined that subsequent statement given ... made addition towards unsecured loans received from Josh Trading Company Pvt Ltd and Viraj Mercantile Pvt Ltd on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing which revealed that the assessee is the beneficiary of bogus accommodation entries provided by Shri Praveenkumar Jain through his bogus companies

Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 776/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.776 &1180/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vs. 1.Income Tax Officer, 1.Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., 5/A, 932, 402, Gopinath Ward 1(1) (1), Surat. Apartment, Jadakhadi, Mahidharpura, Surat.395 003. [Pan: Aaica 4525 F] 2.Income Tax Officer, 2. Albers Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., Ward 1(1) (1), Surat. 5/A, 932, 402, Gopinath Apartment, Jadakhadi, Mahidharpura, Surat 395 003. [Pan: Aaica 4525 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Suchek Anchaliya – Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri J. K. Chandnani – Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On: 27.08.2019

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

Subsequently an information was received from the Director of Investigation (Inv)-II, Mumbai that a search and survey operations were carried out by the Investigation Wing, Mumbai in the case of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain Group of Mumbai on 03.10.2013. During the year under consideration the assessee has carried out transaction ... statement of third party could not be made basis of reopening of assessment. However, the CIT (A) observed that there was credible information from Investigation Wing Mumbai regarding search and seizure action in the case of Shri Bhanwarlal M. Jain who were found engaged in providing accommodation entries. Therefore