G SUKESH Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) : Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext. P6 order issued by the Deputy Director of Income-tax, Investigation, Trivandrum directing valuation of the petitioner's properties. According to the petitioner, this order was passed under section 131(1)(d) of the IT Act, which would not enable the first respondent to order a valuation. Counsel for respondents submitted that under S. 131(1)(d) r/w S. 131(1A) the first respondent has got the power to call for a valuation when he takes up investigation. I have gone through the said provision, especially S. 131(1A). Counsel for the Department submitted that s. 131(1)(d) was misquoted and in any view the first respondent has got jurisdiction under S. 131 (1A) of the IT Act to get a valuation report. Reference was also made to the decision in Jamnadas Madhavji & Co. vs. ITO (1986) 58 CTR (Bom) 1 : (1986) 162 ITR 331 (Bom) : TC 60R.97. I am of the view it is only for the purpose of investigation first respondent called for a valuation report from the 2nd respondent. I do not find any illegality committed by the officer so as to interfere with the direction. Original petition lacks merits and the same is dismissed.