https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788480 A summons issued under Section 131(1A) of the Income-tax Act was upheld because the record did not show cogent evidence of personal malice, improper motive, or colourable exercise of power; the complaint had been received and processed through departmental procedure before approval and issuance. The jurisdictional challenge also failed because an Income Tax Officer authorised under the statutory scheme, read with Section 132, was competent to issue the summons. As no prior pleading or contemporaneous objection established lack of authority, the summons remained valid and the writ petition failed. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Mar 2026 08:49:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788480 A summons issued under Section 131(1A) of the Income-tax Act was upheld because the record did not show cogent evidence of personal malice, improper motive, or colourable exercise of power; the complaint had been received and processed through departmental procedure before approval and issuance. The jurisdictional challenge also failed because an Income Tax Officer authorised under the statutory scheme, read with Section 132, was competent to issue the summons. As no prior pleading or contemporaneous objection established lack of authority, the summons remained valid and the writ petition failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788480