Case Law Details
DCIT Vs T. S. Kumarasamy (ITAT Chennai)
ITAT Chennai held that rejection of special audit report of the special auditor appointed in terms of section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act on flimsy grounds without any finding as to how observation of the special auditor is incorrect.
Facts- The assessee Mr. T.S. Kumarasamy, Prop: M/s Christy Fried Gram Industry (CFI) is engaged in the business of production and supply of weaning food/nutrient supplements to government schemes and mainly to ICDS program of Government of India and Civil Supplies Department of Government of Tamil Nadu, besides, supplying edible oil, dal, rice, eggs to the Midday meal Scheme of the Government of Tamil Nadu.
During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer, considering the voluminous data found during the course of search and complexity involved in the accounts of the assessee, directed the assessee to get his accounts audited as required u/s. 142(2A) of the Act.
The special auditor appointed in terms of section 142(2A) of the Act, has submitted their audit report for all assessment years vide their audit report dated 0312-2020. A further reference was made to special auditor to look into voluminous data found during the course of search including Erandam Thall. The special auditor vide their audit report dated 15-04-2021 has submitted supplementary audit report and commented upon the correctness and authenticity of documents found during the course of search and has also verified entries recorded in Erandam Thall and quantified unidentified entries.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
