← 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

Paras Kumar Jain, Jaipur vs. ITO, Kota

ITA 279/JPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Dec 2018AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri N. Kataria (CA)For Respondent: Shri Jai Singh (JCIT)
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

assessee filed return of income on 10th March, 2009 declaring income of Rs. 6,23,510/-. Subsequently, the AO received information from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai regarding accommodation entries in the shape of Long Term Capital Gain from the concerns of Shri Mukesh Choksi. Accordingly, the AO reopened the assessment ... assessee has submitted that the AO has reopened the assessment based on the information/report of the Investigation Wing, Mumbai without conducting a separate and independent enquiry about the fact whether the claim of the assessee of long term capital gain is genuine or bogus. Hence the 3 Shri Paras Kumar

Smt. Minu Gupta, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 731/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 10(38)

relies to draw adverse inference against the assessee was provided to the assessee. So, the addition based on a general report study of the investigation wing cannot be the sole basis of rejecting the claim of the assessee. 12. In this case, we note that the legal evidence produced ... evidence. 15. We find that the assessing officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) has been guided by the report of the investigation wing prepared with respect to bogus capital gains transactions. 9 Smt. Minu Gupta, AY 2014-15 However, we do not find that the assessing officer

Sri Raj Kumar Kabra, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 47(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1694/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sri Raj Kumar Kabra……...............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant C/O Sri S.L. Kochar, Advocate 5, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Agbpk 7274 M ] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-47(3), Kolkata.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Nicholas Murmu, Jcit D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12Th, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 25/06/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Sole Issue That Arises For My Adjudication Is Whether The Assessing Officer Was Right In Rejecting The Claim Of The Assessee That He Had Earned Long Term Capital Gains On Purchase & Sale Of The Shares Of M/S. Unno Industries Ltd. The Ao Based On A General Report & Modus Operandi Adopted Generally In These Cases & On General Observations Has Concluded That The Assessee Has Claimed Bogus Long Term Capital Gain. He Made An Addition Of The Entire Sale Proceeds Of The Shares As Income & Rejected The Claim Of Exemption Made U/S 10(38) Of The Act. The Evidence Produced By The Assessee In Support Of The Genuineness Of The Transaction Was Rejected.

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 68

specific to any assessee. The assessee was not confronted with any statement or material alleged to be the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department and which were the basis on which conclusion were drawn against the assessee. Copy of the report was also not given

Sri Pawan Kumar Kabra, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 47(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1693/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sri Pawan Kumar Kabra……...............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant C/O Sri S.L. Kochar, Advocate 5, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue Kolkata – 700 019 [Pan : Afnpk 5040 G ] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-47(3), Kolkata.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Nicholas Murmu, Jcit D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 25/06/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Sole Issue That Arises For My Adjudication Is Whether The Assessing Officer Was Right In Rejecting The Claim Of The Assessee That He Had Earned Long Term Capital Gains On Purchase & Sale Of The Shares Of M/S. Unno Industries Ltd. The Ao Based On A General Report & Modus Operandi Adopted Generally In These Cases & On General Observations Has Concluded That The Assessee Has Claimed Bogus Long Term Capital Gain. He Made An Addition Of The Entire Sale Proceeds Of The Shares As Income & Rejected The Claim Of Exemption Made U/S 10(38) Of The Act. The Evidence Produced By The Assessee In Support Of The Genuineness Of The Transaction Was Rejected.

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 68

specific to any assessee. The assessee was not confronted with any statement or material alleged to be the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department and which were the basis on which conclusion were drawn against the assessee. Copy of the report was also not given

Smt. Manju Pincha, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 35(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1465/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Manju Pincha………………...............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant Room No.602 & 603 Sixth Floor 19, Synagogue Street Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Agbpp 5019 K ] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-35(4), Kolkata.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Nicholas Murmu, Jcit D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 31/05/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Sole Issue That Arises For My Adjudication Is Whether The Assessing Officer Was Right In Rejecting The Claim Of The Assessee That He Had Earned Long Term Capital Gains On Purchase & Sale Of The Shares Of M/S. Ncl Research & Financial Services Ltd. The Ao Based On A General Report & Modus Operandi Adopted Generally In These Cases & On General Observations Has Concluded That The Assessee Has Claimed Bogus Long Term Capital Gain. He Made An Addition Of The Entire Sale Proceeds Of The Shares As Income & Rejected The Claim Of Exemption Made U/S 10(38) Of The Act. The Evidence Produced By The Assessee In Support Of The Genuineness Of The Transaction Was Rejected.

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

specific to any assessee. The assessee was not confronted with any statement or material alleged to be the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department and which were the basis on which conclusion were drawn against the assessee. Copy of the report was also not given

Sri Vishal Garach, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1464/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Vishal Garach………………...............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant Suite No. 1402 Second Floor 35, Ezra Street Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Agbpp 5019 K ] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-36(4), Kolkata.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Nicholas Murmu, Jcit D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12Th, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 31/05/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Sole Issue That Arises For My Adjudication Is Whether The Assessing Officer Was Right In Rejecting The Claim Of The Assessee That He Had Earned Long Term Capital Gains On Purchase & Sale Of The Shares Of M/S. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. The Ao Based On A General Report & Modus Operandi Adopted Generally In These Cases & On General Observations Has Concluded That The Assessee Has Claimed Bogus Long Term Capital Gain. He Made An Addition Of The Entire Sale Proceeds Of The Shares As Income & Rejected The Claim Of Exemption Made U/S 10(38) Of The Act. The Evidence Produced By The Assessee In Support Of The Genuineness Of The Transaction Was Rejected.

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 68

specific to any assessee. The assessee was not confronted with any statement or material alleged to be the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department and which were the basis on which conclusion were drawn against the assessee. Copy of the report was also not given

Sri Vishal Garach, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1463/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Vishal Garach………………...............….……...........…………..……………….…...……..….…….......Appellant Suite No. 1402 Second Floor 35, Ezra Street Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Agbpp 5019 K ] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-36(4), Kolkata.……......……….........…………..………….…............Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Nicholas Murmu, Jcit D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 28Th, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 12Th, 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 31/05/2018, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Sole Issue That Arises For My Adjudication Is Whether The Assessing Officer Was Right In Rejecting The Claim Of The Assessee That He Had Earned Long Term Capital Gains On Purchase & Sale Of The Shares Of M/S. Tuni Textile Mills Ltd. The Ao Based On A General Report & Modus Operandi Adopted Generally In These Cases & On General Observations Has Concluded That The Assessee Has Claimed Bogus Long Term Capital Gain. He Made An Addition Of The Entire Sale Proceeds Of The Shares As Income & Rejected The Claim Of Exemption Made U/S 10(38) Of The Act. The Evidence Produced By The Assessee In Support Of The Genuineness Of The Transaction Was Rejected.

Section 10(38)Section 250Section 68

specific to any assessee. The assessee was not confronted with any statement or material alleged to be the basis of the report of the Investigation Wing of the department and which were the basis on which conclusion were drawn against the assessee. Copy of the report was also not given

ITO, Ward - 40(4), Kolkata vs. Shri Vishwanath Gupta, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 1732/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 10(38)Section 11Section 142(1)Section 68

Long Term Capital Gain exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act without appreciating the entire facts and findings in the report of the investigation wing that transactions in shares like NCL Research and several others were nothing but bogus prearranged transactions for giving entries of Long Term Capital Gain ... holding that the A.O. came to the conclusion without carrying out any examination of the directors/promoters of NCL Research, whereas the investigation of the investigation wing was complete with investigations of the all directors and promoters of the scrip and the statements recorded of them. 4. On the facts

Pooja Yadav, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-33(5), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5883, 6457, 6458 and 6459/Del

ITA 6459/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 68

company, an acting Company on MCA website allowed till recently to trade on recognized stock exchange by the SEBI. No copy of report of Investigation Wing have been provided. Assessee has no control over activity of the company in question whether its price rig etc., The SEBI after detailed investigation ... lower authorities have not considered the aforesaid documents and rejected all the claims made by the assessee by relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and thereby made the addition, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. I further find that the AO has given detailed explanation

Sneh Yadav, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-33(5), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5883, 6457, 6458 and 6459/Del

ITA 6458/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 68

company, an acting Company on MCA website allowed till recently to trade on recognized stock exchange by the SEBI. No copy of report of Investigation Wing have been provided. Assessee has no control over activity of the company in question whether its price rig etc., The SEBI after detailed investigation ... lower authorities have not considered the aforesaid documents and rejected all the claims made by the assessee by relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and thereby made the addition, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. I further find that the AO has given detailed explanation

Preeti Yadav, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-33(5), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5883, 6457, 6458 and 6459/Del

ITA 6457/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 68

company, an acting Company on MCA website allowed till recently to trade on recognized stock exchange by the SEBI. No copy of report of Investigation Wing have been provided. Assessee has no control over activity of the company in question whether its price rig etc., The SEBI after detailed investigation ... lower authorities have not considered the aforesaid documents and rejected all the claims made by the assessee by relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and thereby made the addition, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. I further find that the AO has given detailed explanation

Rajesh Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(2), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5971/Del

ITA 5974/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 131

share price was abnormal. The A.O. also noted that department has made search and surveys operations on some share broking entities and Investigation Wing of Kolkata found many brokers indulged in providing accommodation entries of long term capital gains. Statements of some of the brokers viz., Sri 5 I.T.A.No ... Delhi & Others. Bidyoot Sarkar, Sri Nikhil Jain, Sri Sanjay Vora, Sri Rakesh Somani, Sri Anil Khemkha and Sri Jai Kishan Poddar recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata are reproduced in the assessment order. The A.O. observed the modus operandi of LTCG accommodation entry in the assessment order and also referred

Bhushan Garg (HUF), New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(1), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5971/Del

ITA 5973/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 131

share price was abnormal. The A.O. also noted that department has made search and surveys operations on some share broking entities and Investigation Wing of Kolkata found many brokers indulged in providing accommodation entries of long term capital gains. Statements of some of the brokers viz., Sri 5 I.T.A.No ... Delhi & Others. Bidyoot Sarkar, Sri Nikhil Jain, Sri Sanjay Vora, Sri Rakesh Somani, Sri Anil Khemkha and Sri Jai Kishan Poddar recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata are reproduced in the assessment order. The A.O. observed the modus operandi of LTCG accommodation entry in the assessment order and also referred

Pushpa Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(2), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5971/Del

ITA 5972/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 131

share price was abnormal. The A.O. also noted that department has made search and surveys operations on some share broking entities and Investigation Wing of Kolkata found many brokers indulged in providing accommodation entries of long term capital gains. Statements of some of the brokers viz., Sri 5 I.T.A.No ... Delhi & Others. Bidyoot Sarkar, Sri Nikhil Jain, Sri Sanjay Vora, Sri Rakesh Somani, Sri Anil Khemkha and Sri Jai Kishan Poddar recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata are reproduced in the assessment order. The A.O. observed the modus operandi of LTCG accommodation entry in the assessment order and also referred

Anupama Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-40(1), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5971/Del

ITA 5971/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 131

share price was abnormal. The A.O. also noted that department has made search and surveys operations on some share broking entities and Investigation Wing of Kolkata found many brokers indulged in providing accommodation entries of long term capital gains. Statements of some of the brokers viz., Sri 5 I.T.A.No ... Delhi & Others. Bidyoot Sarkar, Sri Nikhil Jain, Sri Sanjay Vora, Sri Rakesh Somani, Sri Anil Khemkha and Sri Jai Kishan Poddar recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata are reproduced in the assessment order. The A.O. observed the modus operandi of LTCG accommodation entry in the assessment order and also referred

Arvind Goenka, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(2), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5883, 6457, 6458 and 6459/Del

ITA 5883/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 68

company, an acting Company on MCA website allowed till recently to trade on recognized stock exchange by the SEBI. No copy of report of Investigation Wing have been provided. Assessee has no control over activity of the company in question whether its price rig etc., The SEBI after detailed investigation ... lower authorities have not considered the aforesaid documents and rejected all the claims made by the assessee by relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and thereby made the addition, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. I further find that the AO has given detailed explanation

Amar Nath Goenka, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.5883, 6457, 6458 and 6459/Del

ITA 5882/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 10(38)Section 68

company, an acting Company on MCA website allowed till recently to trade on recognized stock exchange by the SEBI. No copy of report of Investigation Wing have been provided. Assessee has no control over activity of the company in question whether its price rig etc., The SEBI after detailed investigation ... lower authorities have not considered the aforesaid documents and rejected all the claims made by the assessee by relying on the report of the Investigation Wing and thereby made the addition, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. I further find that the AO has given detailed explanation

Billo, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 1(2), Meerut

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

ITA 3817/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt.Billo, Vs. Ito, C/O Kapil Goel, Advocate, Ward-1(2), F-26/124, Sector-7, Meerut. Rohini. Pan: Bakpb9355A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri D.S. Rawat, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2018 Order

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.S. Rawat, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

taxmann.com 119 2. where Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that where reassessment proceedings were initiated on basis of information received from Investigation wing that assessee had received certain amount from shell companies working as an accommodation entry provider, merely because these transactions were scrutinised by Assessing Officer during original ... held unjustified. Pushpak Bullion (P.) Ltd. Vs DCIT [2017] 85 taxmann.com 84 (Gujarat) 3. where Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that where investigation wing of department had during course of investigation in case of a third party found that he was indulged in providing accommodation entries and bogus bills

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Karam Chand Rubber Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6599/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit, Vs. Karam Chand Rubber Industries Central Circle-7, (P) Ltd., New Delhi. R/O D-1039, New Friends Colony, New Delhi. Pan: Aaack4889J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vijay Verma, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.10.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.12.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th September, 2014 Of The Cit(A)-31, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Cycle/Rickshaw Rims. A Search U/S 132 Of The It Act Was Carried Out At M/S Dhirani Group Of Cases On 28Th July, 2011 During Which The Business Premises Of The Assessee Was Also Covered. In Response To Notice U/S 153A Of The It Act Dated 21St May, 2012, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 13Th June, 2012

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Verma, CIT, DR
Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 40A(2)(b)

ground that these details do not prove the existence of the parties nor about their genuineness. Relying on the report given by the Investigation Wing as well as the report of Ward Inspector, the Assessing Officer held that the assessee failed to prove the identity and genuineness of the parties ... submitted that the Assessing Officer has not made any independent enquiries but heavily relied on the findings of the Investigation Wing. He submitted that it is an admitted fact that a search was conducted which is a serious invasion in the privacy of an assessee and, therefore, assessment in such

Basic Clothing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 4(2), New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 5089/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2009-10 Basic Clothing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito K-55, Udyog Nagar, Ward 4(2), Peeragarhi, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aaecm0177D

For Appellant: Smt. Prelata Bansal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Dora, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

That the Ld. Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) have not brought any material on record, independent of the information received from the Investigation Wing, to prove that the amount subscribed by way of share capital by the two companies was undisclosed income of the assessee. 6. That the assessee ... perverse when he ignored the material fact that the assessee was not confronted with the investigation carried out by the Investigation Wing or was given an opportunity to cross examine the persons whose statements were recorded by the Investigation Wing. 8. That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred