Income Tax

High Court quashed appointment of Special Auditor u/s 142(2A) in Writ Petition

High Court quashed the appointment of Special Auditor u/s 142(2A) when the matter was remanded on a specific issue and no complexity was involved in the adjudication

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2576 (2018) (10) HC

For the relevant assessment year, the petitioner’s return of income was processed and assessment order was passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Thereafter, the Assessing Officer (AO) proposed to reopen the assessment, for which, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued and finally, revised assessment order was passed.

Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), which was allowed.

The said appellate order was challenged by the Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and the Tribunal remanded the matter, only for the purpose of adjudicating the issue regarding the deposit of a specific sum.

As per the order of the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer was directed to verify the issue of deposit with relevant materials and thereafter, to adjudicate the issue afresh as per law.

However, the Assessing Officer, passed the impugned order by which he appointed a chartered accountant as Special Auditor u/s 142(2A) of the Act.

Hence, the assessee had filed a Writ Petition praying quashing of the impugned order appointing Special Auditor and directing the AO to complete the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Act based on the directions of the Tribunal.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that the Tribunal had modify the order of the CIT(A) and set aside the issue of deposit to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification with relevant materials and direction to adjudicate the issue afresh as per law.

No where, the Assessing Officer was directed to entrust the work with Special Auditor. Moreover, in the impugned order also, there was no whisper as to the complexity involved in the adjudication of the case.

The Government Counsel appearing for the Assessing Officer (AO) fairly submitted that the impugned order may be quashed and the matter may be remanded for fresh consideration.

The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned order appointing Special Auditor and the matter was remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

2 days ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

6 days ago