https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10420 The High Court held that it had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petitions as part of the cause of action arose within its limits. It determined that the CAG report could be used by authorities before its discussion in the State Legislature to prevent tax evasion. The court found that the authorities possessed sufficient information, including from discreet inquiries, to justify issuing warrants of authorization. The court concluded that the actions taken under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act were legal and constitutional, upholding the authorities' power to act based on the information available, including the CAG report. The Revenue's appeal was allowed, and other writ appeals were dismissed. en-us Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10420 The High Court held that it had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petitions as part of the cause of action arose within its limits. It determined that the CAG report could be used by authorities before its discussion in the State Legislature to prevent tax evasion. The court found that the authorities possessed sufficient information, including from discreet inquiries, to justify issuing warrants of authorization. The court concluded that the actions taken under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act were legal and constitutional, upholding the authorities' power to act based on the information available, including the CAG report. The Revenue's appeal was allowed, and other writ appeals were dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10420