← 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

ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Jaydeep Profiles P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 3236/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, बनाम/ Bhavan, M.K.Road, Darukhana, Reay Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 086 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar बनाम/ Darukhana, Reay Road, Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 086 Mumbai 400 020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B 2 & 2698/Mum/2016

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

observed/held as under:- “In reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment. He pointed out that the information was received from the investigation wing of the department at Calcutta regarding shell companies which had given accommodation entries for share premium to Surat based companies. A list ... case where entirely new set of documents and materials was placed for his consideration compiled in the form of report received from the investigation wing. Such material was perused by the Assessing Officer and upon examination thereof, he formed a belief that the assessee company had received share application

Jaydeep Profiles Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO WD 6 (3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2698/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, बनाम/ Bhavan, M.K.Road, Darukhana, Reay Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 020 Mumbai 400 086 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B Assessment Year: 2009-10 Jaydeep Profiles P. Ltd., Income Tax Officer 6(3)(2), 142/7 Lakdi Bunder Road, R No.503, 5Th Floor, Aayakar बनाम/ Darukhana, Reay Road, Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. Mumbai 400 086 Mumbai 400 020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaacj8998B 2 & 2698/Mum/2016

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 147Section 148

observed/held as under:- “In reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment. He pointed out that the information was received from the investigation wing of the department at Calcutta regarding shell companies which had given accommodation entries for share premium to Surat based companies. A list ... case where entirely new set of documents and materials was placed for his consideration compiled in the form of report received from the investigation wing. Such material was perused by the Assessing Officer and upon examination thereof, he formed a belief that the assessee company had received share application

Mohini Goel, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- I(5), Faridabad

ITA 2024/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Omwati Aggarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 2(5), Faridabad

ITA 2023/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Shobhit Goel, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- II(3), Faridabad

ITA 2022/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Shoubit Goel HUF, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- II(3), Faridabad

ITA 2021/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Mayank Goel, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- I(5), Faridabad

ITA 2028/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Nand Kishore, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- II(1), Faridabad

ITA 2027/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Shyam Sunder Bansal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- II(3), Faridabad

ITA 2026/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Naina Agarwal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- II(1), Faridabad

ITA 2025/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2014-15 Shoubit Goel (Huf), Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aavhs2861J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shobhit Goel, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aicpg9748H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Omwati Aggarwal, Ito, Ward- 2(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Agtpa2312C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mohini Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Ayqpg2481B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Naina Agarwal, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Apfpg6588K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shyam Sunder Bansal, Ito, Ward- Ii(3), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aivpb4058L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nand Kishore, Ito, Ward- Ii(1), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Acfpk0906Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2014-15 Mayank Goel, Ito, Ward- 1(5), C/O. Kapil Goel, Adv., Faridabad. Vs. F- 26/124, Sector- 7, Rohini, Delhi. Pan : Aixpg9560C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR
Section 10(38)Section 131

account of sale of securities. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by CASS on the basis of information uploaded by the Investigation Wing that “Suspicious transaction relating to long term capital gain on sale of shares”. After examining the information and written submissions filed by the assessee ... from time to time and taking into consideration the sworn statements recorded u/s 131 before the Investigation Wing, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment. He discussed about the features of Penny Stocks which are as under :- 1. Most of these companies have no business

Dnyaneshwar Dhondiba Tupe, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA 2118/PUN/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2108/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sandip Bhanudas Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aampt1909M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2109/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sopan Dhondiba Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aajpt0436E .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2110 & 2111/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2009-10

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

processed under section 1403(1) of Act. The assessing officer on the basis of information received from the investigation wing of the department initiated reopening proceeding under section 147 of the Act after recording reason to belief that there was escapement of assessment of taxable income. The assessing Officer

Bhanudas Dhondiba Tupe, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA 2117/PUN/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2108/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sandip Bhanudas Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aampt1909M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2109/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sopan Dhondiba Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aajpt0436E .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2110 & 2111/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2009-10

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

processed under section 1403(1) of Act. The assessing officer on the basis of information received from the investigation wing of the department initiated reopening proceeding under section 147 of the Act after recording reason to belief that there was escapement of assessment of taxable income. The assessing Officer

Bhanudas Dhondiba Tupe, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA 2116/PUN/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2108/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sandip Bhanudas Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aampt1909M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2109/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sopan Dhondiba Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aajpt0436E .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2110 & 2111/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2009-10

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

processed under section 1403(1) of Act. The assessing officer on the basis of information received from the investigation wing of the department initiated reopening proceeding under section 147 of the Act after recording reason to belief that there was escapement of assessment of taxable income. The assessing Officer

Ramdas Bhanudastupe, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

ITA 2113/PUN/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2108/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sandip Bhanudas Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aampt1909M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita No.2109/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 Shri Sopan Dhondiba Tupe, S. No. 202, Sade-Stra-Nali, Near Vitthal Mandir, Hadapsar, Pune – 411028 Pan : Aajpt0436E .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Pune ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.2110 & 2111/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2006-07 & 2009-10

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147

processed under section 1403(1) of Act. The assessing officer on the basis of information received from the investigation wing of the department initiated reopening proceeding under section 147 of the Act after recording reason to belief that there was escapement of assessment of taxable income. The assessing Officer