← All Phrases

“investigation wing”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 14712,583 judgments

The decision most relied on for investigation wing is PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (396 ITR 5), cited in 272 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on investigation wing

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.
396 ITR 5 · 2017 · High Court
272
citing judgments

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. v. DCIT
293 ITR 43 · 2007 · High Court
264
citing judgments

Where an assessment order is merely a copy-paste of observations from an investigation wing's appraisal report without independent verification, it is not a valid basis for making additions to income.

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.

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.

Judgments citing investigation wing

Jayvadan Rughnathwala, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-1(2)(1), Surat

ITA 923/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth Assessment Year 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.D.R
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69C

alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Information was received from the Investigation Wing that M/s. S.K. Enterprises (Prop. Shahrukhkhan Pathan) is primarily engaged in generating and passing on GST credit to their buyers without any physical movement ... assessee and the assessee field the submissions/response along with the details. The Assessing Officer observed that after issuing the information from the investigation wing, the assessee was asked the file audited financial statement along with head-wise computation of income for the assessment year under consideration. The I.T.A No. 923/Srt/2024

Giriraj Daulal Damani HUF, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chembers

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4516/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

these shares. Thus the assessee could have sold the shares after December 2012. 8.3 The Ld.AO merely proceeded on the report from the investigation wing and did not analyse the penny stock nature of the alleged script. The Ld.AO did not verify the details furnished by all assessee

Narottam Daulal Damani HUF, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chember

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4515/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

these shares. Thus the assessee could have sold the shares after December 2012. 8.3 The Ld.AO merely proceeded on the report from the investigation wing and did not analyse the penny stock nature of the alleged script. The Ld.AO did not verify the details furnished by all assessee

Radhika Anant Damani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chember, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4514/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

these shares. Thus the assessee could have sold the shares after December 2012. 8.3 The Ld.AO merely proceeded on the report from the investigation wing and did not analyse the penny stock nature of the alleged script. The Ld.AO did not verify the details furnished by all assessee

Anant Vijay Damani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Piramal Chamber, Mumbai

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4513/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

these shares. Thus the assessee could have sold the shares after December 2012. 8.3 The Ld.AO merely proceeded on the report from the investigation wing and did not analyse the penny stock nature of the alleged script. The Ld.AO did not verify the details furnished by all assessee

Shri. Bishmit Singh Chawla, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(4)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4238/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Bishmit Singh Chawla Ito Ward 41(4)(1) Coregaon Wine Shop No. Ii Room No. 603 Hanuman Tekdi, Opp. Vs. Kautilya Bhavan Western Express Highway Bandra Kurla Goregaon East Complex, Bandra-E Mumbai-400 063. Mumbai-400 051. Pan : Afapc7509P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Punmiya
Section 11Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 270ASection 271ASection 69A

reassessment can be made just to make an enquiry or verification; b) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiate merely on the information received from investigation wing; c) Reassessment proceeding cannot be initiated when the LD AO have reason to suspect and not reason to believe. 6. On the facts and circumstances

Income Tax Officer-19(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Khodiyar Impex, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3029/MUM/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Us Is Whether The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) Was Justified In Restricting The Penalty To The Tax Sought To Be Evaded On An Addition Of ₹5,59,500/–, As Against The Penalty Levied By The Assessing Officer On The Entire

Section 143(1)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

31/10/2007 declaring income of ₹16,44,320/–. The return was processed under section 143(1). Subsequently, on the basis of information received from the investigation wing that the assessee had allegedly availed accommodation entries in the nature of bogus purchases aggregating to ₹1,86,50,000/–, the case was reopened

Aakash Developers, Thane vs. ACIT, Circle 1, Thane

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1767/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

from sale/advances/booking of flats/lands/shops/TDRs and partners capital. It is also reported that the Assessee has concealed high value of unaccounted cash during the F.Y.2008-09.The investigation wing, Mumbai asked the Assessee to provide entity-wise and Asstt. Year wise details with regard to unaccounted cash / on-money receipts but in spite ... submitted that entire addition of 45,00,000/- made by the Ld.AO is based on an excel sheet prepared by the Investigation wing, and no further verification was carried out by the Ld.AO, neither before issuance of notice u/s.148 nor during the assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR thus emphasised that, based

Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Cir, 20(1), Mumbai vs. Amit Sampathraj Shah, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 5380/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

Section 10Section 143Section 148

case and modus operandi as a detailed investigation 2 ITA no.5380/Mum/2024; A.Y. 2015-16 Amit Sampathraj Shah has been carried out by the Investigation Wing of Kolkata in the scrip M/s. JRI Industries & Infrastructure Ltd.Ground 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the case

Rajesh Harishbhai Shah (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO-Ward-24(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground of appeal raised by assessee is partly

ITA 4890/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Rajesh Harishbhai Shah (Huf) Ito, Ward – 24(3)(1), Mumbai 403/404, Mona Apartment, Near Vs Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Navrang Theatre, J.P. Road, Andheri Mumbai – 400012. (W), Mumbai-400058. [Pan No. Aaahr0439N] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 147Section 254(1)Section 69C

Traders aggregating of Rs. 36,92,969/-. The assessing officer made disallowance solely on the basis of alleged information with the assessing officer from Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department, which was based on information from Sales Tax Department about certain hawala dealers. During assessment, the assessee furnished complete details ... also deliberated on various case laws relied by both the parties. I find that assessing officer made addition on the basis of report of Investigation Wing that certain parties were indulging in providing accommodation entries without actual delivery of goods. The assessing officer made addition of 100% of purchases shown

Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Gurugram vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Faridabad

ITA 45/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 147

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Gurugram vs. ITO Ward -2(1), Faridabad

ITA 44/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 147

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Gurugram vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), Faridabad

ITA 43/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 147

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Gurugram vs. ITO Ward-2(1), Faridabad

ITA 42/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 147

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

Ramesh Kumar Bagri, Gurugram vs. ITO Ward - 2(1), Faridabad

ITA 41/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 147

DDIT (Inv) Faridabad to the AO during the year 2020-21 in which it was shared that the assessee was an entry provider. The investigation wing was in possession of information relating to the assessee's bank account and the transactions there in and their analysis pointed to the fact

Harshit Kochar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 17 New Delhi, Jhandewalan New Delhi

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

ITA 5072/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarharshit Kochar, Vs. Acit, Central Circle 17, 5, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Amypk0228N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Parth Singhal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 Date Of Order : 29 .08.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 06.10.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That The Learned Lower Authorities Have Erred In Nor Appreciating Either On The Fact Or Circumstance, Of The Case & Further Has Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.21,26,142/- U/S 69A R.W.S, 115Bbe Of The Act Which Is Bad In Law.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 69A

Ground No.1 are, search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) was conducted by the Investigation Wing on 22.10.2016 in the case of assessee along with other cases at various residential and business premises. The residential premises of the assessee

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vikash Bhwan Delhi vs. Sumit Chhabra, Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3879/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandrasumit Chhabra Vs. Assessment Unit, Nafac, Hno. 3, Kiran Vihar, Vikas Bhawan Karkardooma,, Anand Delhi Vihar, S.O. Anand Vihar East Delhi – 110092 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aecpc8652G Appellant .. Respondent Acit, Vikash Bhawan Vs. Sumit Chhabra Room No. 216, 2Nd Floor, H. No. 3, Kiran Vihar, D Block, Vikash Bhawan, Karkardooma, I.P. Estate, Delhi Delhi – 110092 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aecpc8652G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148ASection 69C

Subsequently, on the basis of information received accordance with the risk management strategy formulated by CBDT under the head CRIUV/VRI and by the Investigation Wing that the assessee has taken accommodation entries in the form bogus sales/purchase amounting to Rs.2,37,43,753/- during the Financial Year 2017-18 from ... conducted on third party in the case of M/s KK Spun India Ltd. and no such copy of the information/investigation done by the DDIT Investigation Wing has been forwarded to the assessee. Moreso, the purchase was made from M/s KB Enterprise and not from Shri Ashok Jain

Sumit Chhabra, Kiran Vihar, East Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, Nafac, Vikas Bhawan Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3556/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandrasumit Chhabra Vs. Assessment Unit, Nafac, Hno. 3, Kiran Vihar, Vikas Bhawan Karkardooma,, Anand Delhi Vihar, S.O. Anand Vihar East Delhi – 110092 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aecpc8652G Appellant .. Respondent Acit, Vikash Bhawan Vs. Sumit Chhabra Room No. 216, 2Nd Floor, H. No. 3, Kiran Vihar, D Block, Vikash Bhawan, Karkardooma, I.P. Estate, Delhi Delhi – 110092 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aecpc8652G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148ASection 69C

Subsequently, on the basis of information received accordance with the risk management strategy formulated by CBDT under the head CRIUV/VRI and by the Investigation Wing that the assessee has taken accommodation entries in the form bogus sales/purchase amounting to Rs.2,37,43,753/- during the Financial Year 2017-18 from ... conducted on third party in the case of M/s KK Spun India Ltd. and no such copy of the information/investigation done by the DDIT Investigation Wing has been forwarded to the assessee. Moreso, the purchase was made from M/s KB Enterprise and not from Shri Ashok Jain

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-15, Delhi vs. Sanjeev Agrawal HUF, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2035/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 69C

lack of adverse comments from stock exchange and officials of company involved in these transactions and no material relating to assessee was found in investigation wing report, additions made by Assessing Officer had rightly been deleted. 7.2.6 Considering the above facts and submissions and the decision

Sunita Bhardwaj, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 63(1), New Delhi

ITA 1435/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

profession of advocate, filed her return of income, declaring income of INR 46,39,180/-. Based on the information received from ITO, Investigation Wing, Unit-4, New Delhi,the AO initiated re-assessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act on 20.03.2019. Thereafter, various notices were issued