https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27917 The court found the order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under section 132(5) of the Income Tax Act to be illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice. It quashed the order, directing the ITO to reconsider the matter and provide the petitioner-firm with a fair opportunity to substantiate their claim. The court emphasized the importance of fair procedures, especially in cases involving disputed ownership of substantial amounts. Additionally, the court clarified the distinction between the firm and individual partners, ruling that notice to the partner did not suffice as notice to the firm as a separate legal entity. en-us Fri, 03 Jun 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:31:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27917 The court found the order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under section 132(5) of the Income Tax Act to be illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice. It quashed the order, directing the ITO to reconsider the matter and provide the petitioner-firm with a fair opportunity to substantiate their claim. The court emphasized the importance of fair procedures, especially in cases involving disputed ownership of substantial amounts. Additionally, the court clarified the distinction between the firm and individual partners, ruling that notice to the partner did not suffice as notice to the firm as a separate legal entity. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Jun 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27917