https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154239 The court upheld the legality of appointing a special auditor under section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the necessity in cases with complex accounts. It found that principles of natural justice were not violated as the assessee had an opportunity to present objections. The court clarified that section 142(2A) applies independently of section 44AB, focusing on the complexity of accounts. The appointment of a special auditor was deemed justified due to the nature of the accounts and procedural propriety was affirmed. The court allowed the revenue's appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to proceed with the appointment while withholding communication of the assessment until the pending petition is resolved. en-us Fri, 02 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:15:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154239 The court upheld the legality of appointing a special auditor under section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the necessity in cases with complex accounts. It found that principles of natural justice were not violated as the assessee had an opportunity to present objections. The court clarified that section 142(2A) applies independently of section 44AB, focusing on the complexity of accounts. The appointment of a special auditor was deemed justified due to the nature of the accounts and procedural propriety was affirmed. The court allowed the revenue's appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to proceed with the appointment while withholding communication of the assessment until the pending petition is resolved. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154239