Special audit can follow a regular tax audit where account complexity justifies further examination for proper assessment.

Section 44AB audit does not prevent a special audit under section 142(2A) where the Assessing Officer finds the accounts complex and requiring examination by a nominated auditor for proper assessment. Prior approval of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner serves as a safeguard showing application of mind to the necessity of special audit, even after a regular audit. The non obstante language in section 142(2B) does not exclude section 142(2A); it recognises that special audit may operate notwithstanding audit under any other law. The provisions were treated as non-conflicting, and the special audit direction was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether an order directing special audit under section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 can be issued where the assessee's accounts have already been audited under section 44AB, and whether the non obstante language in section 142(2B) excludes the operation of section 142(2A) in such cases.

Analysis: The statutory audit under section 44AB is a general audit based on turnover or income, whereas special audit under section 142(2A) is triggered by the Assessing Officer's finding that the accounts are complex and require examination by a nominated auditor in the interests of proper assessment. The requirement of prior approval by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner indicates application of mind to the necessity of such audit even where a regular audit has already been conducted. The non obstante expression in section 142(2B) does not bar action under section 142(2A); rather, it recognises that a special audit may operate notwithstanding audit under any other law or otherwise. The provisions were held not to be conflicting.

Conclusion: The challenge to the special audit order failed, and the direction under section 142(2A) was upheld.

---