JUDGMENT :

Om Narayan Rai, J.

1. This writ petition assails three notices dated October 24, 2025, October 29, 2025 and November 07, 2025 whereby the respondent revenue authorities have intimated the petitioner about their intent to inspect the jewellery, gold bars etc., seized during a search and seizure operation conducted on June 21, 2022 under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the said Act of 1961”).

FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. Briefly summed up, the relevant facts gathered from the writ petition are as follows:-

a) On June 21, 2022 and on other dates subsequent thereto a search operation under Section 132 of the said Act of 1961 was conducted at the residence and office of the petitioner as well as at the bank lockers of the petitioner and the petitioner’s family members.

b) In course of the search and seizure operation, the entire jewellery/bullion (hereafter “the seized assets”) were seized upon being inspected, measured, serially numbered and valued by the valuers approved by the Income Tax Department in accordance with the prescribed search and seizure procedure and the Search and Seizure Manual issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

c) Subsequently, the petitioner filed its Return of Income (hereafter “ITR”) for the assessment year 2023-24. The same was processed under Section 143(1) of the said Act of 1961 on September 17, 2023.

d) The said ITR was thereafter selected for compulsory assessment and notices dated October 04, 2023 were issued under Sections 143 (2) and 142(1) of the said Act of 1961 thereby calling upon the petitioner to reconcile the seized assets with his books of accounts and wealth tax return, if applicable.

e) The petitioner filed his reply thereto on January 03, 2024 along with reconciliation and a master list explaining the sources of the seized assets. It was submitted by the petitioner that the same belonged to him and his family members. It was the petitioner’s case that a bulk of the seized assets belonged to the petitioner’s father-in-law who had kept the same in the custody of the petitioner’s wife, owing to a family dispute between the petitioner’s father-in-law and the petitioner’s brother-in-law.

f) After considering the petitioner’s reply, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on March 30, 2024 thereby partly accepting the petitioner’s explanation and reducing the unexplained value of the seized assets from Rs.14,00,31,943/- to Rs.12,33,34,445/-. The petitioner has carried the said assessment order in appeal before the appellate authority under Section 246A of the said Act of 1961. The said appeal is pending and it is the petitioner’s contention that the entire issue of addition of jewellery and bullion seized in course of the search operation is subject matter of the said appeal.

g) During pendency of the appellate proceedings, a notice dated March 07, 2025 was issued to the petitioner under Section 263(1) of the said Act of 1961 by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (hereafter “PCIT”) thereby asserting that the assessment order dated March 30, 2024 had been passed without inquiring/verifying the issue of the source of the seized assets and that such aspect rendered the assessment order erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue within the meaning of Section 263 of the said Act of 1961. By the said notice, the petitioner was asked to show cause as to why the order passed by the Assessing Officer should not be revised under Section 263 of the said Act of 1961.

h) The petitioner furnished a detailed reply to the said notice to show cause on March 07, 2025.

i) Subsequently a notice dated October 24, 2025 was served upon the petitioner thereby informing the petitioner that inspection of the seized assets had been scheduled to be taken on October 29, 2025. The petitioner was requested to be present personally or through his authorised person along with two independent witnesses at the strong room of Aayakar Bhawan, Annex Building, 1^st Floor