https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794254 Clause 10(e) of the monetary limit circular was construed as covering information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies, with the examples given being illustrative and not exhaustive. On that basis, the State VAT department was treated as falling within the exception, and excluding it from the clause was legally erroneous. The Tribunal therefore misread Clause 10(e) and was not justified in rejecting the Revenue's miscellaneous application on the ground that the VAT department lay outside the exception. en-us Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Jul 2026 08:07:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794254 Clause 10(e) of the monetary limit circular was construed as covering information received from external sources in the nature of law enforcement agencies, with the examples given being illustrative and not exhaustive. On that basis, the State VAT department was treated as falling within the exception, and excluding it from the clause was legally erroneous. The Tribunal therefore misread Clause 10(e) and was not justified in rejecting the Revenue's miscellaneous application on the ground that the VAT department lay outside the exception. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794254