| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 3260 2006 SLD 3260 (2006) 287 ITR 384 |
Rajasthan High Court
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR BENCH S.N., JHA, C.J. AND R.S. CHAUHAN, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR BENCH S.N., JHA, C.J. AND R.S. CHAUHAN, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Suresh Val Chand Jain*
v.
Union of India
Law:
Section:
Section 132B, read with section 132, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Retained assets, application of - Certain kgs. of gold was recovered from assessee and two others - On being asked, they stated that gold belonged to assessee as proprietor of certain concern - However, income tax authorities seized said gold - Assessee filed writ petition and sought for a direction for release of gold - Single Judge declined to direct release of gold but permitted assessee to make application for release before Assessing Officer - Pursuant to said order assessee filed application under section 132B for release of gold before Assistant Commissioner - Assistant Commissioner found that assessee was not actual owner of bullion, and he was acting as a carrier and name lender for somebody else and gold which was subject-matter was not his stock-in-trade and, accordingly, rejected application for release - Whether since assessee's application for release of gold under section 132B had been rejected by Assistant Commissioner by a well-reasoned order which was based on finding of fact, and moreover, assessee had failed to explain source of seized gold which is pre-requisite condition for seeking release under section 132B, such an order could not be interfered with - Held, yes FACTS Certain Kgs. of gold was seized from the assessee and the two others, at airport. On enquiry, the said persons stated that the gold belonged to the assessee as the proprietor of certain concern. Subsequently, a search was conducted at the premises of the assessee in which certain documents were seized. The assessee, thereafter, filed writ petition for seeking a declaration that the search of the premises and seizure, of gold, bullion was without any authority of law and null and void, and a direction upon the authorities to handover the seized gold to the assessee. The Single Judge declined to direct the release of the gold but permitted the assessee to make an application for release before the Assessing Officer. Pursuant to the said order, the assessee filed an application under section 132B for the release of the gold before the Assistant Commissioner who held that the assessee was…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492