https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16315 The court upheld the validity of provisions setting different dates for audit report submission for companies and non-companies under sections 271B, 44AB, and 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It ruled that the distinction is based on the nature of operations and compliance requirements, justifying separate treatment for companies. The court rejected the petitioners' claim of discrimination, emphasizing the unique characteristics of companies necessitating a later filing date. Previous judgments supported the constitutionality of the differing dates, leading to the dismissal of the writ petitions challenging the provisions. Petitioners were advised to appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal within four weeks. en-us Wed, 18 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Sep 2009 18:20:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16315 The court upheld the validity of provisions setting different dates for audit report submission for companies and non-companies under sections 271B, 44AB, and 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It ruled that the distinction is based on the nature of operations and compliance requirements, justifying separate treatment for companies. The court rejected the petitioners' claim of discrimination, emphasizing the unique characteristics of companies necessitating a later filing date. Previous judgments supported the constitutionality of the differing dates, leading to the dismissal of the writ petitions challenging the provisions. Petitioners were advised to appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal within four weeks. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16315