https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27552 The court granted the petitioner's writ petition, quashing the approval for retention of seized books beyond 180 days under section 132(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court held that the approval given by the Commissioner after the expiration of 180 days was invalid, emphasizing the mandatory nature of timely recording of reasons and approval. Failure to communicate reasons to the concerned person renders the retention unauthorized. The judgment stressed the importance of procedural compliance to prevent arbitrary exercise of power, citing precedents supporting strict adherence to statutory provisions. The court ordered the return of seized books to the petitioner and awarded costs. en-us Tue, 19 Jun 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:29:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27552 The court granted the petitioner's writ petition, quashing the approval for retention of seized books beyond 180 days under section 132(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court held that the approval given by the Commissioner after the expiration of 180 days was invalid, emphasizing the mandatory nature of timely recording of reasons and approval. Failure to communicate reasons to the concerned person renders the retention unauthorized. The judgment stressed the importance of procedural compliance to prevent arbitrary exercise of power, citing precedents supporting strict adherence to statutory provisions. The court ordered the return of seized books to the petitioner and awarded costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 19 Jun 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27552