Deohooti Janmejay Vyas vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2)

Bela M. Trivedi, J

Notice, returnable on 12th July 2021.

It is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Bandish Soparkar for Mrs. Swati Soparkar for the petitioner that the impugned order passed by the

respondent authority is ex facie bad and has been passed without any application of mind inasmuch as, the powers under section 142(2A) of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 could be exercised by the Assessing Officer having regard to the nature and complexity of the accounts, volume of the

accounts, doubts about the correctness of the accounts, multiplicity of transactions in the accounts or specialised nature of business activity of the

assessee, however, in the instant case, the petitioner has income from salary, capital gains and income from other sources and therefore, she is neither

obliged to maintain any books of account nor has maintained any the books of account. Under the circumstances, the respondent could not have

directed the petitioner to get her books of account audited by the nominated auditor. He submitted that the said objection was also raised by the

petitioner before the concerned authorities.

Having regard to the above submissions, the operation and implementation of the impugned direction under section 142(2A) of the IT Act dated

22.04.2021 in case of the petitioner, is stayed till the returnable date.