“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Jadau Jewellers & Mfg (P) Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 502/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal and Shri Gulshan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma, Addl.CIT - DR

Section 142Section 144Section 153A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES , JAIPUR Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Embryonic Properties (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 115/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Amit Shukla & Sri O.P. Kantay: 2009-10 Dcit, Circle 11(1) Vs. Embryonic Properties (P) Ltd. Room No.312 1St Floor, Ece House Cr Bldg. 28, Kasturba Gandhi Marg New Delhi New Delhi 110 001 Pan: Aabce 5708 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.D.R Respondent By : Sh. Vk Aggarwal, A.R.

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Sh. VK Aggarwal, A.R

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 79

amount of Rs.4,32,42,500/- which was to be received from Mr.M.Kishore could not be recovered and this is an admitted fact before Investigation Wing of the department. The assessee in its books of accounts has written off the said amount as bad debt and the same was appropriated ... authorities below. It has also been pointed out by him that these facts were disclosed even before the Joint Director of Income Tax (Investigation Wing), Panaji, Goa vide letter dated 23.1.2010, under proceedings issued under section 131 of the Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act). The A.O. first

Rashtriya Chemicals Copper Corporation, Mumbai vs. ITO 18(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4931/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Section 101Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

this case, it was noted by the AO that assessee had made purchases from following five parties, whose names have been identified by the Investigation Wing of sales-tax department as bogus suppliers / bogus dealers: S.No. Name of the party PAN FY Amount 1. Shiv Sagar Steel (India) AODPP0628N

Gem Corporaiton, Mumbai vs. Jt CIT 22(1), Mumbai

In the results, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2127/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am The Asstt.Commissioner Of M/S Gem Corporation, Income Tax -27(1), 703, Rameshwar, Room No.411, 4Th Floor, Neelkanth Vally, फनधभ/ Tower No.6, Near Rajawadi, Vs. Vashi Railway Station Complex, Ghatkopar (E), Vashi, Mumbai-400077 Navi Mumbai-400703 M/S Gem Corporation, Jt.Commissioner Of Income Mumbai-400077 Tax -22(1), फनधभ/ Room No.4Th Floor,Tower No.6, Vashi Railway Station Cmpl., Vs. Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400703 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaafg5630Q (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri R S KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri H M Wanare

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Unshelled” almonds from USA, besides sourcing the almonds locally also. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO received information from the Designated officer, investigation wing to the effect that the bank accounts have been opened in the name of Mrs. Aruna H Doshi and six others with M/s Janakalyan

Asst CIT 27(1), Mumbai vs. Gem Corporaton, Mumbai

In the results, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1740/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R S KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri H M Wanare

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

M/S. Micromax Informatics Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4641/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. Beena A. Pillai & Sh. Prashant Maharishimicromax Informatics Ltd. Dcit C/O Ved Jain & Associates, Circle Circle - 16 Vs. 100, Babar Road, Opp Hotel Lalit New Delhi New Delhi. Pan : Aabcr8863N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Ms. Nirupama Katru, CIT, DR

Section 142Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(4)Section 40A(3)

telephones, tablet computer, 3G data card is an LED Television. A search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Act was conducted by investigation wing on assessee group of cases on 10.02.2011. Simultaneously, assessee’s premises were also searched. The case of assessee was thereafter, centralized

Shri Gaurav Chopra, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 133/DEL/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 133/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Shri Gaurav Chopra, Vs Income Tax Officer, 3-C/6, New Rohtak Road, Ward-33(1), New Delhi-110005 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aeipc2912D Assessee By : Sh. Gautam Jain, Ca & Sh. P. K. Kamal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.10.2013 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xxviii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, CA &For Respondent: Sh. F. R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)

assessee submitted that the reopening of the assessment was done by the AO only on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing and he did not apply his own mind. The ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention towards page nos. 10 & 11 of the assessee ... initiating the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act and submitted that the AO acted only on the report of the Investigation Wing and did not apply his own mind. Therefore, the reopening itself was not valid. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Principal Commissioner of Income

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed with above direction

ITA 5668/DEL/2013[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2017AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Adv

Section 148

perused the orders of the lower authorities. In the present case the claim of the revenue is that the enquiry carried out by the investigation wing of the Department revealed that five gearboxes worth Rs. 90 lakhs taken by the appellant on lease for its Raigarh units through finance company

Videocon Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1310/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand, D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)

received material from the aforesaid parties was not acceptable on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Sales Tax Department, Pune; Investigation Wing of Mumbai; and also the Investigation carried out by the ADIT (Inv.), Kolhapur. He was of the opinion that the aforesaid entities were wholly ... with the aforesaid, parties are not immediately verifiable. The necessary details as called for have been duly reconciled with necessary supporting and submitted before Investigation Wing as well as in the assessment proceedings. 40 M/s. Videcon Industries Ltd. Therefore, the purchases shown from the aforesaid parties are genuine, the material

ACIT 12(2)(2), Mumbai vs. I & E Trade Consultants P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 798/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.798/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Acit -12(2)(2), M/S I&E Trade बनाम/ Room No. 363, Consultants Pvt. Ltd., V. 3 Rd Floor,, 10 Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Shree Puri Tower, M.K. Road, Soniwadi Shimpoli Road, Mumbai – 400 020. Borivali (West), Mumbai – 400092. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabct9239N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Nikita AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Saurabhkumar Rai,DR

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

duly provided the reasons recorded for re-opening of the assessment vide letter dated 12.08.2013. Information was received by the AO from the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department,Mumbai and based upon the same, the A.O. inferred that the assessee company has claimed expenses which were in fact ... were duly accounted. The A.O. rejected the contentions of the assessee for the following reasons:- “i. It is a matter of record that the Investigation Wing has passed on the information that the abovementioned party viz. Akon Management Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. was one of the entities which was involved

Shri Salasar Polycot Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

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

ITA 5466/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 5466/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Shri Salasar Polycot Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, C-9/77, Sector-8, Rohini, Ward-8(3), New Delhi-110088 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aamcs5177M Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain & Ashish Goyal, Advs. Revenue By : Sh. A. K. Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.02.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.08.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xi, New Delhi. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Relates To The Validity Of The Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act).

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, & Ashish Goyal, AdvsFor Respondent: Sh. A. K. Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

therefore, the proceedings initiated by the AO by issuing the notice u/s 148 of the Act on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing of the department was not valid. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: 3 Salasar Polycot Pvt. Ltd. " ITO Vs Navodaya Castles ... part of this order that the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act were initiated only on the basis of the information received from the Investigation Wing of the department and the AO had not applied his own mind. Therefore, those proceedings were not valid. Accordingly, the reassessment framed

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Satya Prakash & Bros Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 513/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Sh. A. K. Sharma, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. S. B. Gupta, FCA

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

original return filed by assessee was processed under section 143(1) on 09.03.2003. Subsequently on the basis of information received from investigation wing, the case of assessee was reopened as per the provisions of section 147 on 09.04.2007, requiring assessee to file its returns in view of notice issued under ... section 148. 3. The information that was received from investigation wing was that assessee was involved in giving and taking accommodation entries and assessee had received entries which represent unaccounted money in the hands of assessee from various parties. Notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued

Sappphire International, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed, no order as to cost

ITA 4876/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Hiravat (AR)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 254(1)

appellant by its Paper Book dated 04.11.2015 that the issue of notice u/s. 148 by the LAO pursuant to receipt of information from the Investigation Wing without applying his mind/verification is bed-in-law. Under the facts and circumstances of the matter, she ought to have held that the proceedings ... from M/s Daksh Diamonds. M/s Daksh Diamonds was floated by Bhawarnlal Jain Group, who was bogus bill provider as per the investigation conducted by investigation wing and the assessee was one of the beneficiary of such accommodation bill. The assessee was asked to prove the genuineness of purchases, the assessee

Allied Blenders and Distillers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 2574/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri K P DewanFor Respondent: Shri H M Wanare

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B

parties amounting to Rs.4,92,43,370/- which has been proved a hawala entry provider by the enquiries of the Sales Tax Authorities, the investigation wing of Income Tax Department and the inquiry of the AO. It is noted that the appellant during the assessment proceedings could not provide

Allied Blenders and Distillers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 2573/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri K P DewanFor Respondent: Shri H M Wanare

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B

DCIT 5(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Allied Blenders & Distillers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 2447/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri K P DewanFor Respondent: Shri H M Wanare

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B

DCIT 5(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Allied Blenders & Distillers P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 2446/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri K P DewanFor Respondent: Shri H M Wanare

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234B

ITO 32(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Rajan R. Shah (HUF), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed and the Cross

ITA 5326/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Shri Rajen R. Shah (Huf) 32(3)(1), Room No. 107, 1 St 604C, Sumer Nagar, S.V. Road, Floor, C-11, Pratayakshakar Vs. Borivali (W), Mumbai-92 Bhavan, Bkc, Bandra, Mumbai-400051 Pan No.Aaehr3734E Appellant .. Respondent

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147

Hence profit and Loss is not at all affected by above purchases. 4. Briefly stated facts are that the investigation wing of Income Tax received information from sales tax department of Maharashtra state that the assessee has taken bogus bills of electrical lights, lamps and fitting accessories for an amount

DCIT Cir 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Utilites P. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 224/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 68

allotted seven crores CCPS of Rs. 10 each at a premium of Rs. 90 per share to Biometrix. This transaction was investigated by the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department, Mumbai upon receipt of commercial intelligence report dated 10.08.2012 from the High Commission of India, Singapore ... from Singapore or from other countries mostly tax havens and hence the report stated that the ultimate source needs to be ascertained. 4. The investigation wing of the Income Tax Department, Mumbai carried out the investigation in the matter and the findings in its report dated 10.07.2012 are extracted

DCIT 9(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Devu Tools P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3967/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Devu Tools Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, C/O. M/S Ravi & Dev, Charged 8(1), Mumbai Accountants 601, ‘A’ Wing, Vs. Aurus Chambers, Behind Mahindra Towers, Ss Amrutwar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-13 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No.Aaacd8770H Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Devu Tools Pvt. Ltd., 8(1), Mumbai C/O. M/S Ravi & Dev, Charged Accountants 601, ‘A’ Wing, Vs. Aurus Chambers, Behind Mahindra Towers, Ss Amrutwar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-13 Appellant .. Respondent .. Shri. Vijay Mehta, Ar Assessee By Revenue By .. Shri. Sumon Kumar, Dr .. Date Of Hearing 19-01-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 17-02-2017

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 31-10-2012 by the investigation wing of the Mumbai, Income Tax department, whereby it was detected that the assessee company is indulging in bogus purchases and has made aggregate purchase of Rs.14