SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Cal) 30

SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE
DWARKA PROSAD AGARWALLA – Appellant
Versus
DIRECTOR OF INSPECTION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L.PAL, Nirmal Mukherjee, PATHAK, SAMAR BANERJI, Suchit Kumar Banerjee

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) IN this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges the searches at his place of business as well as at his residence and the seizure of certain jewellery, books, papers, documents and money, etc. , and asks for the orders cancelling such searches under Section 132 of the I. T. Act, 1961, and certain other consequential orders.

( 2 ) THE petitioner carries on, according to the petitioner, business since 1957 and states that he had been furnishing his returns regularly and was being assessed to income-tax as such. The petitioner carries on business at No. 6, Karballa Mohammed Street, Calcutta, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-X, being the respondent No. 4, and his subordinate Income-tax Officer, D-Ward, District IV (1), Calcutta, respondent No. 5. The petitioner at all material times and even now resides at No. 6, Dr. Rajendra Road, Calcutta. On the 12th January, 1977, the Director of Inspection, being respondent No. 1, issued a warrant of authorisation under Section 132 (1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, to search the petitioner's residence and office and







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top