https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344513 The court upheld the order for a special audit under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, finding that the Assessing Officer validly exercised the power due to the complex nature of transactions and specialized business activities. Procedural requirements, including providing a reasonable opportunity to be heard and obtaining approval from the Principal Commissioner, were deemed to have been met. The court concluded that there was proper application of mind by the authorities, and the reasons cited for the special audit were relevant to the assessment year in question. Previous assessments and audits were considered relevant, leading to the dismissal of the petition challenging the special audit order. en-us Fri, 09 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344513 The court upheld the order for a special audit under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, finding that the Assessing Officer validly exercised the power due to the complex nature of transactions and specialized business activities. Procedural requirements, including providing a reasonable opportunity to be heard and obtaining approval from the Principal Commissioner, were deemed to have been met. The court concluded that there was proper application of mind by the authorities, and the reasons cited for the special audit were relevant to the assessment year in question. Previous assessments and audits were considered relevant, leading to the dismissal of the petition challenging the special audit order. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 09 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344513