<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2003 (1) TMI 96 - DELHI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12227</link>
    <description>The court upheld the validity of special audit orders issued under Section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, finding that they were justified based on the complexity of the accounts and the interests of the Revenue. It concluded that the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner had appropriately applied their minds, dismissing the writ petitions challenging the orders. The court vacated interim orders staying the assessment proceedings and did not award costs to the petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51239" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 96 - DELHI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12227</link>
      <description>The court upheld the validity of special audit orders issued under Section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, finding that they were justified based on the complexity of the accounts and the interests of the Revenue. It concluded that the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner had appropriately applied their minds, dismissing the writ petitions challenging the orders. The court vacated interim orders staying the assessment proceedings and did not award costs to the petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12227</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>