← 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

DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai vs. Gibs Computers Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2066/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh. B.R. Baskaran & Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपी अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No.2066/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपी अपी िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.Ita No. 2071/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year- 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit-Central Circle-40 M/S.Gibs Computers Ltd. 6Th Room No.653, Floor, Radha Bhavan, 121 Nagindas Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs Master Road Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400 023. Pan: Aabcg 0096 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सेसेसेसे/Assessee By : S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Neelkanth Khandelwal राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Ms. Sasmita Misra--Cit-Dr, िनधा"रती िनधा"रती ओर ओर सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 04.03.2016 Order लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य बी बी.आर आर. बा बा"करन "करन केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार/ Per B.R. Baskaran, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य बी बी आर आर बा बा "करन "करन अनुसार अनुसार The Revenue Has Filed These Two Appeals Challenging The Orders Passed By Ld Cit(A)-36, Mumbai For Assessment Years 2007-08 & 2008-09. Since Issue Urged In Both The Appeals Is Identical In Nature, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order, For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. The Revenue Is Aggrieved By The Decision Of Ld Cit(A) In Deleting The Additions Made By The Ao U/S 68 Of The Act.

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal and Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Ms. Sasmita Misra--CIT-DR
Section 68

No.3852/M/09 dated 19.10.2011 respectively. It has been stated that under similar circumstances where statements of various individuals were recorded by the Investigation Wing at Kolkata and where no opportunity was given to the appeellants to cross examine the share applicants during the course of assessment proceedings, Hon'ble ITAT deleted ... account payee cheques and not through any cash transaction. Hon'ble ITAT further held that statements recorded during the course of investigation by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata without any corroborative evidence had no evidentiary value. It may be pertinent to advert to the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT