https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32988 The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision that the warrant of authorization issued by the Additional Director of Income Tax (Investigation) was invalid. Consequently, the period of limitation was correctly reckoned from the panchnama dated 25.05.2000. The judgment emphasized strict adherence to statutory provisions and the necessity of specific empowerment for officers conducting search and seizure operations under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act. en-us Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32988 The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision that the warrant of authorization issued by the Additional Director of Income Tax (Investigation) was invalid. Consequently, the period of limitation was correctly reckoned from the panchnama dated 25.05.2000. The judgment emphasized strict adherence to statutory provisions and the necessity of specific empowerment for officers conducting search and seizure operations under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32988