https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15092 The court dismissed the petition challenging the authorization issued under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, finding it valid based on substantial information. It held that compliance with section 132(9A) was not breached as the authorized officer had jurisdiction over the petitioner. The court deemed the notices and summons issued under sections 158BC and 131(1A) legal, given the validated authorization. The transfer of the case from Bhavnagar to Rajkot under section 127(2) was upheld for administrative reasons, with recorded and communicated justifications. The petition was rejected without costs. en-us Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Jul 2009 18:47:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15092 The court dismissed the petition challenging the authorization issued under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, finding it valid based on substantial information. It held that compliance with section 132(9A) was not breached as the authorized officer had jurisdiction over the petitioner. The court deemed the notices and summons issued under sections 158BC and 131(1A) legal, given the validated authorization. The transfer of the case from Bhavnagar to Rajkot under section 127(2) was upheld for administrative reasons, with recorded and communicated justifications. The petition was rejected without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15092