Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT

236 ITR 671High Court1999#2558 most cited

What is Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

A higher authority's approval for an income tax proposal must reflect an application of mind to the facts and cannot be deemed from a mere nomination. An assessment made without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee violates principles of natural justice and is therefore invalid.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT · 236 ITR 671 · Section 153D · Section 142(2A) · prior approval · application of mind · natural justice · audi alteram partem · valid assessment · reasonable opportunity · Section 132 · Section 148

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 142(2A)Section 153ASection 153DSection 143(3)Section 148Section 264Section 144

Issues it is cited on

section 144basection 288section 153a(1)(a)section 136section 158bgsection 142(2a)section 193section 196assistant directorsection 264section 153(3)block period

Judgments citing Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1988/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Neetu Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1866/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

Neetu Nayaar, Delhi vs. ACIT, CC 20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1077/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1290/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1289/DEL/2020[2013-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2013-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1288/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

Neetu Nayyar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in :

ITA 1287/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 153ASection 153D

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been advan…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 311/RJT/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…The question of law framed is therefore answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 13.11 Likewise, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us. An argument has been advanced to the effect that by making such a nomination, approval will be deemed to have been granted. The answer to the said contention must be rendered ITA nos.315-317/Rjt/2017 Asstt. Year 2012-13 10 in the negative. The Ch…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 310/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…The question of law framed is therefore answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 13.11 Likewise, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us. An argument has been advanced to the effect that by making such a nomination, approval will be deemed to have been granted. The answer to the said contention must be rendered ITA nos.315-317/Rjt/2017 Asstt. Year 2012-13 10 in the negative. The Ch…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 309/RJT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…The question of law framed is therefore answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 13.11 Likewise, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us. An argument has been advanced to the effect that by making such a nomination, approval will be deemed to have been granted. The answer to the said contention must be rendered ITA nos.315-317/Rjt/2017 Asstt. Year 2012-13 10 in the negative. The Ch…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 308/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…The question of law framed is therefore answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 13.11 Likewise, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us. An argument has been advanced to the effect that by making such a nomination, approval will be deemed to have been granted. The answer to the said contention must be rendered ITA nos.315-317/Rjt/2017 Asstt. Year 2012-13 10 in the negative. The Ch…

M/S. Impact Forging, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 307/RJT/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.307 To 311/Rjt/2018 निर्धररवरध/Asstt. Years: (2011-2012 To 2015-16) M/S. Impact Forging, D.C.I.T, 6, Mani Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-1, Near Popullar Roller, Rajkot. Mavdi Plot, Rajkot. Pan: Aadfi1340Q

For Appellant: Shri P.C Yadav, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…The question of law framed is therefore answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 13.11 Likewise, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us. An argument has been advanced to the effect that by making such a nomination, approval will be deemed to have been granted. The answer to the said contention must be rendered ITA nos.315-317/Rjt/2017 Asstt. Year 2012-13 10 in the negative. The Ch…

Sh. Mdlr Hotels P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the captioned appeals by the Revenue are

ITA 3076/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Feb 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

…hus, even the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down that the approval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case. 27. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. Vs DCIT 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us: “The factual matrix of the matter clearly shows that a proposal was made on March 10, 1998, and no prior approval therefore was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income tax but merely one G. P. Agarwal was nominated. An argument has been adv…

Sh. S.L. Arora, Mohali vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 275/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH CHANDIGARH Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1325/CHANDI/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] ……….Appellant vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh ……. Respondent I.T.A. No.274/CHANDI/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar........................... ………................……............…..….. Appellant H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh............................................……. Responden…

Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Mohali vs. DCIT, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 274/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH CHANDIGARH Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1325/CHANDI/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] ……….Appellant vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh ……. Respondent I.T.A. No.274/CHANDI/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar........................... ………................……............…..….. Appellant H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh............................................……. Responden…

DCIT, Chandigarh vs. Sh. S.L. Arora, Mohali

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 1421/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH CHANDIGARH Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1325/CHANDI/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] ……….Appellant vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh ……. Respondent I.T.A. No.274/CHANDI/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar........................... ………................……............…..….. Appellant H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh............................................……. Responden…

Sh.Sohan Lal Arora, Mohali vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 1326/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH CHANDIGARH Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1325/CHANDI/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] ……….Appellant vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh ……. Respondent I.T.A. No.274/CHANDI/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar........................... ………................……............…..….. Appellant H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh............................................……. Responden…

Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Mohali vs. ACIT, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing

ITA 1325/CHANDI/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

Section 142Section 153

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH CHANDIGARH Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.1325/CHANDI/2010 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] ……….Appellant vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh ……. Respondent I.T.A. No.274/CHANDI/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Rajiv Kumar........................... ………................……............…..….. Appellant H. No.123, Phase-3B1, Mohali. [PAN: AFYPK8488H] vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Chandigarh............................................……. Responden…

M/S. United Engineers, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Rajkot

In the result, the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 305/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav, with Shri Dinesh Ruprelia, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash Singh, CIT, D.R
Section 153DSection 254Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…oval must reflect the application of mind to the facts of the case.” ITA No.305/Rjt/2018 with 18 others A.Y. 2012-13 & others 12 14.10 Likewise, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT[1999] 236 ITR 671 has made the following observations which are pertinent to the facts of the case in hand before us. "An argument has been advanced to the effect that by making such a nomination, approval will be deemed to have been granted. The answer to the said contention must be rendered in the negative. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax before granting su…

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, (Now DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3)), Mumbai

ITA 4984/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सिं./ Ita No. 4984/Mum/2016 (ननधाायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of 1608/09, Prasad Chambers, Income Tax, Opera House Central Circle-46, Mumbai फनाभ/ (Now Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Vs. Circle 8(3), Mumbai) (अऩीराथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामीरेखासिं./Pan No. Aaccr 2413 B आमकयअऩीरसिं./ Ita No. 5829/Mum/2016 (ननधाायणवषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) The Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Tax, Ltd. Central Circle-46, Mumbai 1608/09, Prasad Chambers, फनाभ/ (Now Deputy Commissioner Of Opera House Income Tax, Central Circle 8(3), Vs. Mumbai) (अऩीराथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Percy J. PardiwallaFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik, Shri Sushil Kumar
Section 142Section 143(3)

…examine the assessee's books of accounts by placing reliance in West Bengal State Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. JCIT 267 ITR 345 the Calcutta High Court inter alia following its earlier judgment in the case of Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd. v. DCIT 236 ITR 671, has observed that unless the Assessing Officer examines the books of account, he cannot have any understanding as to the nature and complexity of the same, ITA Nos. 4984 & 5829/Mum/2016 Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd.; 08-09 consequently is not possible for him to come the conclusion for necessity of special audit. Therefore, the Assessing Officer w…