On writ petitions against the directions issued on April 22, 2021 for special Audit was affirmed considering bogus claims and voluminous material was seized during the course of search and post-search proceedings conducted at various premises of the D group Court held that the Assessing Officer had the jurisdiction to give directions for a special audit under section 142(2A), and that the directions were neither arbitrary, illegal nor beyond the scope of the provision. On petitions for special leave to appeal dismissing the special leave petitions Court held that that there was no reason to interfere with the judgment and order passed by the High Court, which was a well-reasoned and well-considered judgment.
Dishman Carbogen Amcis Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 443 ITR 227 / 212 DTR 127 / 325 CTR 707 / 285 Taxman 192 (SC) Dishman Infrastructure Ltd. v. ACIT (2022) 443 ITR 227 / 212 DTR 127 / 325 CTR 707 / 285 Taxman 192 (SC) Editorial : Decision in Dishman Infrastructure Ltd v. ACIT (2021) 437 ITR 487(Guj)(HC) affirmed.
S. 142(2A) : Inquiry before assessment-Special audit-Voluminous material seized during Search-Bogus claims-If two or three queries out of forty five queries unwarranted, entire order giving directions could not be treated as nullity-Directions neither arbitrary, illegal nor beyond scope of provision. [Rule 14A, Form 6B]