https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33195 The court quashed the showcause notice and consequential order under Section 142(2A) for two companies due to lack of jurisdiction, rendering the audit reports and assessment orders invalid. These petitions were allowed. However, for the other two companies, the petitions were rejected based on the timing of filing post-audit completion. The court differentiated between the companies based on jurisdictional issues and procedural considerations, ultimately providing a detailed analysis and resolution for each issue raised in the legal proceedings. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Dec 2012 15:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33195 The court quashed the showcause notice and consequential order under Section 142(2A) for two companies due to lack of jurisdiction, rendering the audit reports and assessment orders invalid. These petitions were allowed. However, for the other two companies, the petitions were rejected based on the timing of filing post-audit completion. The court differentiated between the companies based on jurisdictional issues and procedural considerations, ultimately providing a detailed analysis and resolution for each issue raised in the legal proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33195