https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56779 The Tribunal held that the notice issued under section 148 was valid despite being in a different name due to the mention of both names in the partnership deed and the application of section 292B. Regarding the accounting of seized gold ornaments, the Tribunal found that the AAC erred in not allowing examination of relevant registers, remanding the issue for fresh consideration by the ITO. The Department's appeal was allowed, with directions for further examination and a hearing for the assessee. en-us Wed, 25 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Dec 2010 16:51:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56779 The Tribunal held that the notice issued under section 148 was valid despite being in a different name due to the mention of both names in the partnership deed and the application of section 292B. Regarding the accounting of seized gold ornaments, the Tribunal found that the AAC erred in not allowing examination of relevant registers, remanding the issue for fresh consideration by the ITO. The Department's appeal was allowed, with directions for further examination and a hearing for the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 25 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56779