HIND ELECTRICIANS Vs. D V SRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in the present writ petition was to an order dt. 9th May, 1984 passed by Respondent No. 1 under s. 142(2A) of the IT Act, 1961. By the said order the petitioner-herein had been directed to get his accounts audited by a firm of Chartered Accountants.

(2.) IN the Writ Petition serious allegations of mala fides had been alleged against the respondent. It is not necessary to spell out what the allegations were. Respondent No. 1 has filed his affidavit denying the allegations but no affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No. 3. Counsel for the respondents, of course, says that it is an inadvertent omission.