← 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

Juliet Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 5452/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5452/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Juliet Industries Limited Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Aaykar Bhawan Vs. Lower Parel M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5975/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Income Tax Officer 6(3)(3) Juliet Industries Limited Room No. 524, 5Th Floor A-313 बनाम/ Aaykar Bhawan Shah & Nayar Industrial Estate Vs. M.K.Road Lower Parel Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacj-6924-H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Vijay Mehta, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Vidhyadhar, Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

entities are providers of bogus bills. These parties have issued the bills without actual delivery of goods. As per the information provided by the investigation wing, it was emerged that the purchases shown by the assessee from the above parties are non-genuine and the assessee has obtained accommodation entries

DCIT Cir. 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Nina Bhadrashyam Kothari, Mumbai

ITA 2343/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./2343/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./2344/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit-Circle-3(3)(1) Smt. Nina Bhadrashyam Kothari Room No.609, 6Th Floor 39, Seawind, Cuffe Parade, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Colaba, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400 006. Pan:Aahpk 5415 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: S/Shri Abhijit Patankar & V. Vidhyadhar-Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/01/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 28/03/2018 लेखा सद"य सद"य, राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार- Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dated 29/01/2016 Of The Cit(A)-8, Mumbai,The Assessing Officer(Ao) Has Filed Present Appeal.The Assessee Is An Individual & Is Director Of M/S. Spellbound Trading Pvt. Ltd. Details Of Dates Of Filing Of Returns,Returned Incomes,Dates Of Assessments & Assessed Incomes Can Be Tabulated As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: S/Shri Abhijit Patankar & V. Vidhyadhar-CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147

added to her total income.Vide her letter dated 25.02.2014,stated that she did not own the said account.From the information received from the investigation wing of Chinnai,the AO found that husband of the assessee Bhadrashayam Harshad Kothari(BHK) and the assessee were the beneficial owner of the account i.e.Sisal

Asst CIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Anand Shree Impex Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4404/MUM/2016[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4404/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1994-95) Asst. Cit – 1(1)(1), M/S. Anand Shree Impex Ltd. बनाम/ 579, Aayakar Bhawan, 1, Mistry Court, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 208, Dinsha Vacha Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacf 6879 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Pooja Swaroop ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri B. N. Rao सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 13.03.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 22.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 14.03.2015 & Pertains To Assessment Year 1994-95. 2. The Ground Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. “Whether Cit(A) Is Justified To Ignore The Date On Which The Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Pooja SwaroopFor Respondent: Shri B. N. Rao
Section 132Section 254(2)Section 271Section 275

Rs.68,72,610/-which included a claim of Rs.49,50,000/- which was depreciation available at 100% in respect of Jumbo Crates. The investigation wing of the Income tax department conducted a search u/s. 132 at the residence of one Mr. Damania on 23rd November 1995 in the course