← 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

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gold Mohur Profiles Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4102/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Aby T. Varkey & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2004-05 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Gold Mohur Profiles Ltd., Ward-12(2), Room No. 337, 31, Gujaranwala Town-Ii, C.R. Building, New Delhi G.T. Karnal Road, New Delhi (Pan: Aaacg2316G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By : S/Sh. K. Sampath & V. Raja Kumar, Adv. Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.12.2015 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: The Present Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 02.04.2013 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-Xv, New Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2004-05, Raising The Following Grounds Of Appeal: I. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,55,000/- U/S 68 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. Ii. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,55,000/- U/S 68 Of The Act Despite The Settled Position Of Law That The Onus Was On The Assessee To Establish The Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Of The Transaction Which Assessee Had Failed To Do. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) Has Deleted The Addition Of Rs. 10,55,000/- U/S 68 Of The Act, Disregarding The Finding Of The Department That The Assessee Has Introduced Its Own Unaccounted Money In Its Bank As Accommodation Entries.

For Appellant: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DRFor Respondent: S/sh. K. Sampath & V. Raja Kumar, Adv
Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

been credited into assessee’s bank account with OBC, LSC-6, Derawala Nagar, Delhi by way of transfer entries. On investigation made by the Investigation Wing it has been found that assessee is a beneficiary of taking the aforesaid accommodation entries. I have also perused various materials and report from ... Investigation Wing and on that basis it is evident that the assessee company has introduced its own unaccounted money in its bank by way of accommodation entries, therefore, I have reason to believe that the income amounting to at least Rs. 10,55,000/- has escaped assessmen