Special audit fee determination upheld where the bill was examined, work assessed, and no arbitrariness was shown.

A special audit fee and expense determination under section 142(2D) was upheld because the Chief Commissioner examined the audit bill, considered the nature and volume of work done, and reduced the claim by disallowing 30% while allowing the balance. The record did not show arbitrariness or any compelling ground for interference under articles 226 and 227. Later agreement to pay the fee in instalments also supported the absence of further interference. The writ challenge failed and the order fixing the special audit fees and expenses remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the determination of audit fees and expenses under section 142(2D) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, pursuant to a special audit ordered under section 142(2A), was arbitrary or required interference under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The Chief Commissioner examined the audit bill, considered the nature and volume of the work done, and reduced the claim by disallowing 30 per cent of the amount while allowing the balance. The materials on record did not show the determination to be arbitrary or to call for reconsideration. Since the fee had also later been agreed to be paid in instalments by arrangement between the assessee and the chartered accountant, no further interference was warranted.

Conclusion: The challenge to the fee determination failed; no interference was called for under articles 226 or 227.

Final Conclusion: The petition was dismissed and the order fixing the special audit fees and expenses was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A fee determination made on consideration of the audit bill and the work involved will not be interfered with in writ jurisdiction absent arbitrariness or other compelling grounds.

---