“investigation wing”

Vishal Kumar Vijay, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Meerut

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2015-16] Shri Vishal Kumar Vijay Vs. The I.T.O, 220, Chahmemran Ward - 2(4) Nandram Chowk, Meerut. Meerut Pan: Aeypv 6911 M [Appellant] [Respondent]

beneficiaries of accommodation entries provided by the entry provider in the form of LTCG involving penny stock companies. Drawing support from the Investigation Wing, Kolkata, the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee asking him to explain as to why LTCG should not be treated as bogus

Rashmi Maheshwari, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-58(3), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu

plethora of decisions passed by the Hon’ble High Courts and ITAT wherein, similar views of lower authorities on basis of probabilities and stated investigation wing information, have been consistently overruled. Ld. counsel for the assessee also filed the Written submissions and pleaded that similar view may be applied here ... whose statements the revenue relies to make the addition, is provided to the assessee. The addition is made based on a report from the investigation wing. 13. The issue for consideration before us is whether, in such cases, the legal evidence produced by the assessee has to guide our decision

Veena Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 33(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena A Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishiay: 2014-15 Veena Gupta Vs. Acit 88, Poorvi Marg, Vasant Vihar, Circle 33(1) New Delhi. New Delhi. Aagpg8753L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. H.P. Agarwal, Fca Ms. Prashuka Jain, Fca Department By : Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/11/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/11/2018 Order Per Beena A Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 23/01/17 Passed By Ld. Cit (A)-11, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2014-15 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. “The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Confirming Addition Of Rs. 1,39,32,231/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act On Account Of Long Term Capital Gain On Sale Of Shares By Treating The Same As Unexplained Credit Entries. 2. The Order Passed By The Ld.Cit(A) Is Bad In Law, Since The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao – A) By Treating The Purchase & Sale Of Shares As Sham & Bogus, Totally Ignoring The Reliable & Credible 1

total income of Rs.37,48,600/-. Case was selected for scrutiny due to suspicion of long term capital gain on shares as informed by investigation wing. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued to assessee, along with questionnaire and notice under section ... violation of principles of Natural Justice. He submitted that copies of statement by Sh. Amit Dalmia and Sh. Narendra Kumar Jain recorded by investigating wing was not provided to assessee. He submitted that on merits, Section 68 of the Act is not applicable, as assessee had provided explanation for credit

Himanshu Chowdhary, Faridabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Faridabad

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

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

short “Act”). Later on, the case of the assessee was selected under scrutiny through CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious Transaction relating to Long Term Capital Gain on Sale of Shares” and statutory notices were issued and served in time upon the assessee

Mohan Lal Agarwal (HUF), Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(4), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

appellant reflect such a huge price rise in the shares of a defunct company without corresponding fundamentals, corroborated by information received from Investigation Wing of Department that the shares have been traded violating the SEBI's guidelines. In view of these facts it cannot be said that appellant has discharged ... submitted that such a huge rise in the price itself shows that everything was not right and in some of the case, Investigation Wing Kolkata has found that scrip of M/s. CCL International Ltd. were used for providing accommodation entries by the brokers. Thus, the order of the Assessing Officer

Mukta Gupta, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(4), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

appellant reflect such a huge price rise in the shares of a defunct company without corresponding fundamentals, corroborated by information received from Investigation Wing of Department that the shares have been traded violating the SEBI's guidelines. In view of these facts it cannot be said that appellant has discharged ... submitted that such a huge rise in the price itself shows that everything was not right and in some of the case, Investigation Wing Kolkata has found that scrip of M/s. CCL International Ltd. were used for providing accommodation entries by the brokers. Thus, the order of the Assessing Officer

Diwakar Marketing P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

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

passed by Ld Assessing Officer u/s 147/143(3) without appreciating that “rubber stamp” reasons in present case are based on unconfronted “appraisal report” of investigation wing and are without independent application of mind; 1.2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... erred in sustaining the order passed by Ld Assessing Officer u/s 147/143(3) without appreciating that reasons are inchoate and dictated by investigation wing as Ld AO has no where strained his nerve to find out the nature of transaction (here sale of shares) which were completely overlooked and aborted

Haryana Distillery Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09 Haryana Distillery Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 16, Community Centre, Circle-11(1), New Friends Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aabch0933K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate Shri Raj Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.08.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 4Th December, 2017 Of The Cit(A)-35, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company & Filed Its Return Of Income On 31St March, 2010 Declaring Income At Rs.1,73,82,410/-. The Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act Was Completed On 30Th December, 2010 At An Income Of Rs.1,73,93,322/-. Subsequently, The Assessing Officer Reopened The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act By Recording The Following Reasons:-

above amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- has been credited into assessee's bank account in F Y. 2007-08. Investigation made by the Investigation Wing of the Department has found that assessee is a beneficiary of taking the aforesaid accommodation entries. I have also perused various materials and report ... from Investigation Wing and on that basis it is observed that the assessee company has introduced its own unaccounted money in its bank account by way of above accommodation entries. On perusal of the documents on record as well as the information received from the investigation wing, I am satisfied

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Second Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K. Narasimha Charyi.T.A. No.3189Del/2015 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Dcit, Circle –23(2), Vs Second Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. C-62, Basement, (Pan: Aajcs6446E) South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Respondent By: Shri Manoj Gupta, Ca Shri Kundanwahi, Fca Order Date Of Hearing: 19.11.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 .11.2018 Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm Challenging The Order Dated 12/03/2015 In Appeal No. 370/14-15 Passed By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Osd) (Appeals)-8, New Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Revenue Preferred This Appeal & On The Following Grounds:-

added in law and on facts in ignoring the fact that necessary enquiries about the escapement of income were already conducted by the investigation wing from which information was received for initiating proceedings u/s 148 of the IT act. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has added ... particulars furnished by DDIT (Inv.), the name of the assessee also found place. On a perusal of the documents/information supplied by the 3 investigation wing, learned Assessing Officer formed an opinion that the material reveals that the assessee has also been providing accommodation entries regularly, and although the assessee company