← 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

Income Tax Officer Ward 25(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Amit B. Mody, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 420/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-Ld. DR
Section 143Section 145(3)Section 147Section 3

reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification. b) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiate merely on the information received from investigation wing. c) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiated when the Ld. CIT(A) have reason to suspect and not reason to believe. 3. On the facts

DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kishco Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6894/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhacit-2(2)(1) M/S Kishco Limited Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Plot No. 71-E To T, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Govt. Industrial Estate, Road, Churchgate, Charkop, Kandivli (West), Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400067. Pan: Aaack2894F Appellant Respondent : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai (Dr) Appellant By Respondent By : Shri Paresh Shaparia (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2019 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 Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)

losses or profit. The Pr DIT informed the assessing officer that CCM transaction obtained from NSE and after detailed analysis, it was noted by investigation wing that the brokers are misusing the CCM and created non-genuine Profit & Loss. On the basis of information, the Assessing Officer forms an opinion ... material available on record. The ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of the assessing officer. The ld. DR submits that the investigation wing conducted inquiry about the modus operandi of CCM and the assessing officer made addition after granting opportunity to the assessee. The ld DR prayed

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1351/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Amount of Proposed international
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘I-1’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Ostwal Diamonds P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1082/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhostwal Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. Pcit(1), Office No. 201/1A Wing, Ashar I.T.Park, 6Th Floor, Ostwal Park, Jesal Park, B Wing, Road No. 16-Z, Bhayander (E)-401105. Wagle Industrial Estate, Vs. Pan: Aaaco4853A Thane (W)-400604. Appellant Respondent : Shri Rajesh Shah (Ar) Appellant By Respondent By : Shri Awungshi Gimsen (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Shah (AR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 263

further submits that the ld. Pr CIT has not made any enquiry on the issue and just on the basis of information provided by Investigation Wing passed order under section 263 of the Act. The ld. PCIT has only information from Investigation Wing and not made any enquiry ... return in response to the notice under section 148. During the re-assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer on the basis of information received from investigation wing noted that the assessee has received accommodation entry from Gautan Jain & Co. who were providing purchase bills. The assessee has allegedly received bill from

M/S Sel Textiles Limited, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-III, Ludhiana

In the result, theappeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 695/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.695/Chd/2018 धििागरणवर्ग / Assessment Year :2014-15 बिाम M/S Sel Textiles Limited, The Dcit, 273-74,G.T. Road, Central Circle-Iii, Dhandari Kalan, Ludhiana Ludhiana स्थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Aancs0401M अपीलाथी/Appellant प्रत्यथी/Respondent धििागररतीकीओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca राजस्वकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Sh. Ram Mohan, Cit Dr सुिवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2019 उदघोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.04.2019 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ram Mohan, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 271Section 271A

factual position with the books of accounts and projections and bring the evidence to unearth the undisclosed income. Neither the A.O. nor the investigation wing linked the cost of profit or cost of asset to the entries in the books of accounts or to the sales conducted by the assessee ... return of income. The AO levied penalty u/s 271AAB on such additional income offered to tax. The Tribunal noted that neither the Investigation Wing in the post search nor during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found any incriminating evidence of undisclo sed income otherwise the declaration

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., Noida

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6101/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153A

Traders Rs. 1,01,712/- (ii). U-Tek Sales Corporation Rs.87,72,250/- In the course of search proceedings, it was noticed by the Investigation Wing that these parties were not in existence at the addresses mentioned on the bills and could not be found in the field enquiries also

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., Noida

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6100/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153A

Traders Rs. 1,01,712/- (ii). U-Tek Sales Corporation Rs.87,72,250/- In the course of search proceedings, it was noticed by the Investigation Wing that these parties were not in existence at the addresses mentioned on the bills and could not be found in the field enquiries also

Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4983/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153A

Traders Rs. 1,01,712/- (ii). U-Tek Sales Corporation Rs.87,72,250/- In the course of search proceedings, it was noticed by the Investigation Wing that these parties were not in existence at the addresses mentioned on the bills and could not be found in the field enquiries also

Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4982/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153A

Traders Rs. 1,01,712/- (ii). U-Tek Sales Corporation Rs.87,72,250/- In the course of search proceedings, it was noticed by the Investigation Wing that these parties were not in existence at the addresses mentioned on the bills and could not be found in the field enquiries also

Paramount Propbuild Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4981/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 153A

Traders Rs. 1,01,712/- (ii). U-Tek Sales Corporation Rs.87,72,250/- In the course of search proceedings, it was noticed by the Investigation Wing that these parties were not in existence at the addresses mentioned on the bills and could not be found in the field enquiries also

Singla Forging Pvt. Ltd., Rohtak vs. DCIT, Rohtak

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 2785/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Navin Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 132(4)Section 68

called for the remand report from the A.O, in which the A.O. has reported that assessee was confronted with the report of Investigation Wing and statement recorded under section 132(4) with regard to M/s. Dreamland Plaza Ltd. The assessee was also confronted that statement recorded under section ... Forging Pvt. Ltd., Rohtak. Ltd., - Rs.25 lakhs, totaling to Rs.45 lakhs. The A.O. confronted the statements of Directors recorded under section 132(4) by Investigation Wing, Kolkata in which they have admitted to have provided bogus bills and bogus entries along with bogus investments in shares etc. The assessee

M/S. Vivid Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 3842/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Ahuja, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

this case was also subjected to proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Act on the basis of information received from investigation wing regarding receipts of accommodation entries by 3 ITA No.3842/Del./2015 the assessee company. Assessee declared an income of Rs.23,710/- by filing return of income which

DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Lal Baba Seamless Tubes Pvt. Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1637/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 68

received by the creditor were given out immediately on the same day to others. It has been amply documented by the Income Tax Department Investigation wing and assessment orders of assessing officers of the Department that these companies are created and exists only for providing bogus funds in lieu

Lal Baba Seamless Tubes (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1033/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 68

received by the creditor were given out immediately on the same day to others. It has been amply documented by the Income Tax Department Investigation wing and assessment orders of assessing officers of the Department that these companies are created and exists only for providing bogus funds in lieu

I.T.O. - 3(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Cosmos Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7150/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G Manjunatha () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ito, 3(1)(3), Mumbai Vs M/S Cosmos Realtors Pvt Ltd 112, Makers Chambers-Iii Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400 021 Pan : Aaccc6177F Appellant Respondednt

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 69B

Family 3 Land A/c (XIV) (5846.40 2-12.2005 Rs 10.98.500/- Sq.Yds) Jage Ram, Shanti Devi & Bijender Singh 9) Subsequently information has been received from investigation wing, New Delhi vide letter No. F. No. ITO(INV)/Unit-IV(2)/2012-13/16 dated 15.03.2013 of the ITO(lnv.), Unit-IV(2), New Delhi ... other person during the course of search in respect of the details contained in the hard disc. Even, the information received from the investigation wing was never corroborated with any evidence, statement that any cash changed hands for the transaction. When the Ld. Assessing Officer recorded the statement of Shri

Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 34(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6628/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 6628/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal, Vs Acit, A-57, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Circle-34(1), New Delhi-110052 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ackpa3670L Assessee By : Sh. Pancham Sethi, Fca Revenue By : Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 11.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.04.2019 Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-12, New Delhi Dated 13.07.2018. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Order Passed U/S 250(6) By The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 By The Ld. Assessing Officer Is Bad In Law. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred Both In Law & On The Facts Of The Case By Upholding The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer To Initiate Reopening & Reassessment Of The Case U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act 1961. 3. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 5,96,177/- Made By Ld. Ao U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 By Treating Certain Share Transactions As Bogus. 4. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Recognizing The Fact That The Client Code Modification (Ccm) Was Done To Rectify The Genuine Errors Held At The End Of Broker For Which The Assessee Was Not Responsible. 2 Kamal Kishoree Aggarwal 5. Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Order Of Ld. Ao Even When The Ld. Ao Failed To Provide The Details Of The Transactions Where Client Code Was Modified. 6. Ld. Assessing Officer Has Erred Both In Law & On Facts Of The Case In Initiating Penalty Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Read With Section 274 Of The It Act, 1961. 7. The Appellant Craves Leave To Amend, Delete Or Add Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” 3. In Ground Nos. 1 & 2 Of The Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Reopening Of Assessment Made U/S 147 Of The Act Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Sh. Pancham Sethi, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

basis of the above their Lordships of the Hon'ble Delhi High have concluded as follows: - "That while the report of the Investigation Wing might have constituted material on the basis of which the Assessing Officer formed the reasons to believe, the process of arriving at such satisfaction could ... without exception that the persons who had got book profits in their books had obtained losses so to set off their book profits. The Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad collected information in this regard from Stock Exchanges / Commodity Exchanges. The Assessing Officer reopened the case of the Assessee on the basis

M/S. Omega Biotech Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. ITO, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2570/DEL/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri B.R.R.Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Vinit Kumar Bindal, CA & Ms. SweetyFor Respondent: Shri P.V.Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 147Section 148

valid ignoring the fact that the notice u/s 148 has been issued merely on the basis of the information received from Investigation Wing. Thus, the assessment so made should be cancelled. II. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition ... there was no independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer had merely relied upon report of the Investigation Wing of the department. It was submitted that the assessee was permitted to take this legal ground at the second round of application and for that purposes

M/S. One City Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2036/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. One City Promoters Pvt. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ltd., Ward-13(4), New Delhi D-2, Kalindi Colony, New Delhi Pan :Aaaco0322J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Jitender Chaurisa, Company Secretary Respondent By Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 68

said that the assessee has established the identity of the parties. It has further been observed that the report of the investigation wing cannot conclusively prove that the assessee's own monies were brought back in the form of share application money. As noted in the earlier paragraph ... compliance with the rules of natural justice. Out 10 of the 22 companies whose names figured in the information given by them to the investigation wing, 15 companies had provided the so-called "share subscription monies" to the assessee. There was thus specific involvement of the assessee- company

Sh. Gauri Shankar Sharma, Ajmer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ajmer

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 35/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Apr 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain (CA)For Respondent: Ms. Anuradha (JCIT)
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

Sewa Parishad. Balance amount of consideration was paid during the F.Y. 2008-09. 5. The A.O. reopened the assessment as per information received from Investigation Wing, Jaipur by the A.O., one Sh. Madan Mohan Gupta has accepted on money receipt on sale of Revenue Residency Scheme which

Kavita Gupta, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2579/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Apr 2019AY 2013-14
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

Subsequently, the assessments for both the years under consideration were reopened by the AO on the basis of specific information received from the investigation wing and in the assessments completed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act by orders dated 29.12.2017 for both the years under consideration, the claim