← 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

ACIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Adhunik Cement Ltd., (Now Dalmia Bharat Cement), Guwahati

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1375/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicialmember)

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 250

statements of Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sharma and Mr. Dilip Kumar Khetan, recorded u/s 131(1A) of the Act, on 13/03/2016, by the investigation wing, was provided to the assessee. On 19th December, 2016, the assessee made a request for cross-examination of Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sharma and Mr. Dilip Kumar ... reopening of the assessee was bad in law. He submitted that the reopening of the assessment was made based on information received from the investigation wing i.e. DDIT (Inv.) Unit-1(2), Guwahati (hereinafter the ‘DDIT (Inv.)’) on 22/03/2016. He submitted that the letter contained information that the assessee

ACIT 32(1), Mumbai vs. Gujarat Estate, Mumbai

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

ITA 6990/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2007-2008

For Appellant: Shri V VidhyadharFor Respondent: Shri R C Modi & Ms Ketki Rajeshirke
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

loan from the group concerns controlled by Bhanwarlal Jain as such the AO's finding and reliance placed on the investigation made by the Investigation Wing was right." 4. "On the fact and in the circumstances of the case the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee ... identity of the parties, genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the lenders with necessary evidences in the backdrop of clear findings from the Investigation Wing, wherein Shri Bhanwarlal Jain had categorically admitted before the authorities that he was involved in providing accommodating entries through his companies operated

Vashdev G Adnani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2322/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vashdev G Adnani, Acit 19(1) G-4, Sea Crest, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai Vs. Seven Bunglows Gardens, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 061. Pan Abapa7414M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 234B

fact. From the documentary evidences available on the files it is clear that an action u/s.132A of the Act was carried out by the investigation wing of the department in the case of the assessee and a panchnama was also drawn. Therefore, the stands taken by the JCIT

M/S. Neminath Electricals, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 79/PUN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak/Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 148

declaring total income of Rs.6,04,946/- for the assessment year under consideration. On the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing of Sales Tax Department, AO issued notice u/s.148 of the Act to the assessee. AO found that assessee made purchases from six suppliers namely, (1) Padmavati Trading

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Vimal Chand Surana HUF, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 437/JPR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 May 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 131Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292C

Subsequently, a search and seizure operation was conducted on Shri Rajendra Jain Group and his associate group members on 23-05-2013 by the Investigation wing, Jaipur of the Income Tax Department, in which Mr. Madan Mohan Gupta was also covered. During the course of search and seizure operation

Income Tax Officer-32(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Manjula B Hedpara, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4669/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4669/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Income Tax Officer-32(2)(3), Smt. Manjula B Hedpara Room No. 305, 3Rd Floor, A-1101, Pratap Heritage, बनाम/ C-11, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, N. R. Complex, L. T. Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Borivali – W, Mumbai-400 092 Mumbai-400 051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagpp 3465 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Hemalatha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Ketki S. Rajeshirke

For Appellant: Ms. HemalathaFor Respondent: Ms. Ketki S. Rajeshirke
Section 131Section 68

loan from the group concerns controlled Dy Bhanwarlal Jain as such the AO's finding and reliance placed on the investigation made by the Investigation Wing was right." (iv) "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Ld CIT(A) that the assessee ... income from business, long term capital gain & other sources. A search & seizure action was conducted in the Bhanwarlal Jain group of cases by Investigation Wing, Mumbai. As a result of search, it was found by the Investigation Wing that this group is a leading entry provider of Mumbai. There

Income Tax Officer-32(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Payal Nitesh Hedpara, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4668/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4668/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito-32(2)(5) Payal Nitesh Hedpara R. No. 307, 3Rd Floor, C-11, A-1101, Pratap Heritage, बनाम/ Pratakshyakar Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra, N. R. Complex, L. T. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 051 Borivali (West), Mumbai-400 092 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaxph 0404 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Hemalatha N. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ketki S. Rajeshirke

For Appellant: Shri Hemalatha NFor Respondent: Shri Ketki S. Rajeshirke
Section 131Section 68

loan from the group concerns controlled by Bhanwarlal Jain as such A.O.'s finding and reliance placed on the investigation made by the Investigation wing was right." 4. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee ... individual deriving her income from business, house property & other sources. A search & seizure action was conducted in the Bhanwarlal Jain group of cases by Investigation Wing, Mumbai. As a result of search, it was found by the Investigation Wing that this group is a leading entry provider of Mumbai. There

Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3006/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

framed u/s 144 of the Act and no reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification merely on information received from Investigation Wing and further reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on suspicion. The assessee has also ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 3 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul ... Patankar, strongly defended the reopening of assessment by arguing that it was validly done. It was pleaded that certain information were received from the investigation wing. Our attention was invited to the reasons for reopening of case u/s 148, which has been reproduced in the assessment order. It was pleaded

Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3005/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

framed u/s 144 of the Act and no reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification merely on information received from Investigation Wing and further reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on suspicion. The assessee has also ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 3 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul ... Patankar, strongly defended the reopening of assessment by arguing that it was validly done. It was pleaded that certain information were received from the investigation wing. Our attention was invited to the reasons for reopening of case u/s 148, which has been reproduced in the assessment order. It was pleaded

Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-4(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3004/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

framed u/s 144 of the Act and no reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification merely on information received from Investigation Wing and further reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on suspicion. The assessee has also ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 3 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul ... Patankar, strongly defended the reopening of assessment by arguing that it was validly done. It was pleaded that certain information were received from the investigation wing. Our attention was invited to the reasons for reopening of case u/s 148, which has been reproduced in the assessment order. It was pleaded

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2315/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

framed u/s 144 of the Act and no reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification merely on information received from Investigation Wing and further reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on suspicion. The assessee has also ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 3 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul ... Patankar, strongly defended the reopening of assessment by arguing that it was validly done. It was pleaded that certain information were received from the investigation wing. Our attention was invited to the reasons for reopening of case u/s 148, which has been reproduced in the assessment order. It was pleaded

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2314/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

framed u/s 144 of the Act and no reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification merely on information received from Investigation Wing and further reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on suspicion. The assessee has also ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 3 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul ... Patankar, strongly defended the reopening of assessment by arguing that it was validly done. It was pleaded that certain information were received from the investigation wing. Our attention was invited to the reasons for reopening of case u/s 148, which has been reproduced in the assessment order. It was pleaded

DCIT Cir. 4(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Vipul Impex & Infrabuild Ltd., Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2313/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

framed u/s 144 of the Act and no reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification merely on information received from Investigation Wing and further reassessment proceedings cannot be initiated on suspicion. The assessee has also ITA Nos.2313 to 2315 and 3004 to 3 3006/Mum/2016 M/s Vipul ... Patankar, strongly defended the reopening of assessment by arguing that it was validly done. It was pleaded that certain information were received from the investigation wing. Our attention was invited to the reasons for reopening of case u/s 148, which has been reproduced in the assessment order. It was pleaded

M/S. Niyati Foods Private Limited, Jharsuguda vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar

ITA 160/CTK/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 May 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2006-2007

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Kumar Kedia, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 131Section 250(4)Section 68

officer had issued summons to the alleged corporate share holders but they did not appear before the assessing officer. On field enquiries by the Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, none of these corporate share holders are found to exist. If these 4 corporate share holders are raising genuine capital

Vidya Reddy, Chennai vs. ITO Inl. Taxation Ward 1(2), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2016/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2016/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mrs.Vijaya Prabha, JCITFor Respondent: 15.05.2018
Section 10(38)Section 68

bank statement reflecting the payments made etc. Meanwhile, the A.O received certain details based on the country wide investigation carried out by the Investigation Wing of Kolkata, which revealed that there was an organized racket of generating bogus entries of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) which is exempt from ... contra, the DR invited our attention to the orders of the Lower authorities wherein the modus operandi and pattern detected by the Investigation Wing, the SIT report on misuse of exemption on LTCG tax for money laundering and certain terms in relation to these transactions are mentioned. The relevant portion

Shyamdhar S. Mishra, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(2), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4314/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 133(6)Section 147

noted that the assessee claimed to have made purchases from M/s Navoday Trade Impex Private Ltd.. There was an information received from the investigation wing that the assessee made purchases from the aforesaid party which is listed as Hawala trader at the website of the Sales Tax Department. Before

Shyamdhar S. Mishra, Mumbai vs. ITO 13(2)(3), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4313/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 133(6)Section 147

noted that the assessee claimed to have made purchases from M/s Navoday Trade Impex Private Ltd.. There was an information received from the investigation wing that the assessee made purchases from the aforesaid party which is listed as Hawala trader at the website of the Sales Tax Department. Before

ITO, Jaipur vs. Alook Finetrade P Ltd, Jaipur

In the result, ground no.2 taken by the assessee company is allowed

ITA 180/JPR/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 May 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

from the appropriate authority. The reasons so recorded are reproduced as under: “The assessee company is assessed to tax with this ward. Enquiries of investigation Wing, Delhi have unearthed huge accommodation entry racket being operated by various groups of operators. The report clearly indicates that accommodation entries have been taken ... plough back unaccounted income in shape of gifts, share application money, loans etc. The investigation Wing's list of beneficiaries (of such accommodation entries), gives comprehensive details of Beneficiary's Name, Beneficiary Bank Name, Beneficiary's Bank Branch, Account No of Beneficiary in which entry is taken, date on which

Damodar Oil Mills Company Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 515/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 68

plain reading of the reasons recorded, it can be noted that notice u/s 148 is issued solely on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Mumbai where it referred to various evidences found during search operation in case of Praveen Jain group of cases. The primarily condition for initiating ... vague, all consequent proceeding are also illegal and invalid. This shows that AO mechanically and blindly acted upon the information received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai without applying his own mind to arrive at ITA 515/JP/2016_ 4 M/s Damodar Oil Mills Company P Ltd. Vs ITO believe that income

Merta Oil Mills Company Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 516/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 147Section 148Section 68

plain reading of the reasons recorded, it can be noted that notice u/s 148 is issued solely on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing, Mumbai where it referred to various evidences found during search operation in case of Praveen Jain group of cases. The primarily condition for initiating ... that AO mechanically and blindly acted upon the ITA 516/JP/2016_ 4 M/s Merta Oil Mills Company P Ltd. Vs ITO information received from the Investigation Wing, Mumbai without applying his own mind to arrive at believe that income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Hence, the reopening of assessment only