The Delhi High Court held that merely because the Assessing Officer had received information in accordance with the CBDT risk management strategy, it did not exclude recourse to Explanation 2(iv) to the proviso to section 148, where incriminating material relating to the assessee was also found during search on a group concern. The Court further held that once approval of the Principal Commissioner had been obtained for issuance of notice under section 148, the assessee’s contention that a separate additional approval under clause (c) of the proviso to section 148A was also mandatory was untenable, since both approvals were substantially identical in nature. Accordingly, the writ petition challenging the notice was dismissed. (AY. 2021-22).