← 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, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mukesh Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 are dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3549/DEL/2012[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapg2585Q Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

Group of Pan masala and Gutkha products for Karnataka Region. Subsequently, on the next day Sh. Sohanraj Mehta was also covered by the Investigation Wing of Bangaloare and confronted with those incriminating documents. During the search operation, Sh. Sohanraj Mehta accepted that those documents were related to him and were ... assessee were also covered alongwith RMD Gutkha Group in search operation conducted on 20.01.2010. The AO pointed out that the documents seized by the Investigation Wing of Bangalore included loose papers containing signed chits having details of payments to various parties including the assessee on which instructions were issued either

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Mukesh Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 are dismissed while the appeal for the assessment year 2008-09 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3546/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3546, 3547 & 3549/Del/2012 Asstt. Years : 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs Sh. Mukesh Garg, Income Tax, Circle-12, 292, Katra Peran, Tilak Bazar, New Delhi Delhi-110006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapg2585Q Assessee By : Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. K. P. Ganguli, Adv. & Sh. G. S. Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Chander Sharma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 68

Group of Pan masala and Gutkha products for Karnataka Region. Subsequently, on the next day Sh. Sohanraj Mehta was also covered by the Investigation Wing of Bangaloare and confronted with those incriminating documents. During the search operation, Sh. Sohanraj Mehta accepted that those documents were related to him and were ... assessee were also covered alongwith RMD Gutkha Group in search operation conducted on 20.01.2010. The AO pointed out that the documents seized by the Investigation Wing of Bangalore included loose papers containing signed chits having details of payments to various parties including the assessee on which instructions were issued either

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7588/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

sales tax department and which are presumed as hawala dealers by the sales tax Department. accordingly an open enquiry was conducted by the investigation wing and during the course of the said enquiry certain incriminating documents/material were impounded. The Dy. Comm. of Income Tax - 13(1), Mumbai, reopened the assessment

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7587/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

sales tax department and which are presumed as hawala dealers by the sales tax Department. accordingly an open enquiry was conducted by the investigation wing and during the course of the said enquiry certain incriminating documents/material were impounded. The Dy. Comm. of Income Tax - 13(1), Mumbai, reopened the assessment

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7586/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

sales tax department and which are presumed as hawala dealers by the sales tax Department. accordingly an open enquiry was conducted by the investigation wing and during the course of the said enquiry certain incriminating documents/material were impounded. The Dy. Comm. of Income Tax - 13(1), Mumbai, reopened the assessment

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7585/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

sales tax department and which are presumed as hawala dealers by the sales tax Department. accordingly an open enquiry was conducted by the investigation wing and during the course of the said enquiry certain incriminating documents/material were impounded. The Dy. Comm. of Income Tax - 13(1), Mumbai, reopened the assessment

Mercury Internaitonal, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 24, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 7584/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.7584 To 7588/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 To 2011-2012) M/S Mercury International, Vs. Cit(A)-24, Mumbai 207, Sant Tukaram Road, Opp.Sita Hotel, Iron Market, Mumbai-400009 & M/S Kagalwala & Associates स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaafm 6318 D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam Jadhav याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2007-2008 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee In All The Years Under Consideration, Which Relates To Validity Of Reopening As Well As Merit Of The Addition Made On Account Of Bogus Purchase. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. As The Facts & Circumstances In All The Years Under Consideration Are Same, As A Lead Cease, We Shall Take The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2007-08. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Engaged In The Business Of Ship Chandlers, General Merchants & Suppliers Of Marine

For Appellant: Dr. K.Shivram&Ms.Neelam JadhavFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta
Section 143(3)

sales tax department and which are presumed as hawala dealers by the sales tax Department. accordingly an open enquiry was conducted by the investigation wing and during the course of the said enquiry certain incriminating documents/material were impounded. The Dy. Comm. of Income Tax - 13(1), Mumbai, reopened the assessment