High Court quashed an order directing special audit, holding that no fruitful purpose would be served after 19 years of delay and stay, disposing of the writ petition.
Annulled orders dated 22.12.2006 and 05.04.2007 for conducting special audit; writ petition disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~61
GURVINDER PAL SINGH .....Petitioner Through:
versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC with Mr.Gaoraang Ranjan, Ms. Sakshi Shainwal & Ms. Harshita Kotnu, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR O R D E R % 07.04.2026
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/04/2026 at 12:24:07
following reliefs:-
"(i) Quashing order dated 22/12/06 passed by the respondent authority directing the accounts of the petitioner to be subjected to a Special audit U/s 142 (2A).
(ii) Quashing order dated 05/04/07 passed by the CIT dismissing the petition under section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
…….”
2. Despite service, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner when the matter was called out.
3. On perusal of the record, we find that on 15.05.2007, following interim order was passed by this Court:
"In the meanwhile, there will be a stay of the operation of the order dated 22nd December, 2006 read with the order of 05"' April, 2007”
4. We are of the view that after passing of 19 years, no frutiful purpose would be served in subjecting the petitioner to special audit.
5. Mr. Vipul Agrawal, learned Senior Standing Counsel to obtain instructions from the Department as to whether Department still intends to proceed with the notice for special audit.”
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/04/2026 at 12:24:07
conducive for the Department now to conduct special audit. We opine so because the petitioner is not being represented here.
DINESH MEHTA, J
VINOD KUMAR, J
APRIL 7, 2026 kk
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/04/2026 at 12:24:07
1 issue framed by the court
Whether special audit proceedings initiated under Section 142(2A) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 can be quashed due to delay and lack of petitioner representation.
GURVINDER PAL SINGH
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
DINESH MEHTA
VINOD KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
