Law:

Section:

Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Whether when places of persons of diverse activities and unconnected with each other are searched and their bank accounts are freezed to get or gather materials and information to form a belief that assessee is avoiding tax, it is wholly outside scope of search and seizure under Act - Held, yes - Whether 'reason to suspect' in sub-sections (1A) and (4A) is subject to satisfaction of primary test of 'reason to believe' under section 132(1) - Held, yes - Whether flourishing business under a brand name cannot be a reason to believe of evasion of tax law by an individual selling products of that brand name - Held, yes - Whether likelihood of getting undisclosed things at premises of an individual at best can be a 'reason to suspect' but does not form any 'reason to believe' - Held, yes - Whether each case has to be independently established within room of 'reason to believe' under section 132(1)(c) and thereafter question of nexus or connection with others will arise - Held, yes - Whether period of sixty days provided in section 132(8A) is mandatory in nature which shall not be in a force after expiry of that period and, therefore, continuance of proceedings of search and seizure would be illegal after expiry of that period - Held, yes - Whether question of good faith will arise when authorities are confirmed that income has not been or would not be disclosed - Held, yes FACTS The petitioner was an individual and was running the sole proprietary business of manufacturing and selling the products of 'Haldiram Bhujiawala' under the name and style of 'PFP'. During search on 24-9-2001 at the business and residential premises of the assessee, certain amount of cash, jewellery, documents, credit-card, etc., were seized and respondent No. 1 made list of inventories in the name of 'PFP (P.) Ltd.', but not in the name of 'PFP', the proprietorship concern of the petitioner. On 26-9-2001, the petitioner received letter from bankers that pursuant to the prohibitory order of respondent No. 1, under section 132(3), the bankers were not in a position to allow the operations of the bank accounts of the petitioner and…

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