- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Both these writ petitions are decided by this common order since the facts and issues involved are the same.
(2.) The Petitioner is aggrieved against the Auditor's Report submitted on 28th June, 2011 before the Assessing Authority and the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the Assessing Authority appointed the Auditor Under Sec. 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order dated 27.12.2010 and he was allowed to complete the audit within a period of two months. However, he did not complete the audit within two months, then he sought the extension of time from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) who vide order dated 29.04.2011, extended the time to complete the audit but it was also extended only upto 31.05.2011 whereas the Auditor submitted the audit report on 28.06.2011.
(3.) According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner the Commissioner of Income Tax had No. jurisdiction to extend the time. However, it may be relevant to mention here that hearing in the case was going on and according to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the next date before the Assessing Authority is 22nd of August, 2011.;