https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14904 The High Court found that the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner did not give objective consideration to the case. The Court noted that the audit would impose a heavy burden on the petitioner and that the mere fact of reconciling stocks was not sufficient justification for the audit. The Court deemed the Commissioner's order as mechanical and perfunctory, quashing it and directing a reconsideration based on the Assessing Officer's recommendation. en-us Thu, 13 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:41:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14904 The High Court found that the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner did not give objective consideration to the case. The Court noted that the audit would impose a heavy burden on the petitioner and that the mere fact of reconciling stocks was not sufficient justification for the audit. The Court deemed the Commissioner's order as mechanical and perfunctory, quashing it and directing a reconsideration based on the Assessing Officer's recommendation. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14904