Back
GANESH RAM MEENA
Bhagwati Jewellers – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The factual matrix of the case in brief is that the official respondents conducted a search operation at the business premises of the petitioners on 15.02.2020/16.02.2020. During such search operations, gold bullion of 3773.52 gm. was seized along-with other articles like electronic devices mobile phones, hard disk etc.
2. The petitioners filed instant writ petition stating that they are engaged in the business of trade of gold bullion and the petitioner firm is duly registered under the VAT/Goods and Service Tax Act (GST). During the search operations by the respondents, 3773.52 gm. Gold bullion which is stock in trade was seized along-with other articles. It is further stated that the petitioners requested the respondents that all the seized goods are duly recorded in the accounts of books of the petitioner firm and also are in stock in trade, which as per the law cannot be seized but the respondents did not pay any heed to their request and at the time of seizure, the persons of the Raid Party misbehaved, mishandled and physically assaulted the petitioner No.2 and the employees of the petitioner firm. It has been further stated that a representation was submitted to the
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the gold bullion seized during the search was stock-in-trade and duly accounted in the books of accounts, as per the relevant provisions of FE....
Seizure under the Income Tax Act should be conducted with due care and caution, and should not be based solely on suspicion. The seizure of goods should be justified and in accordance with the provis....
Seizure of stock-in-trade under the Income Tax Act requires clear evidence of undisclosed income; mere suspicion is insufficient.
The court ruled that stock-in-trade cannot be seized under Section 132(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, unless proper justification is provided by the assessee.
The power of seizure under Section 67 of the Act is limited to goods liable for confiscation and is not for the recovery of tax but to ensure compliance and aid proceedings against tax evasion.
Quasi-judicial proceedings require strict adherence to principles of natural justice, including the right to cross-examine witnesses, which was violated in this case, rendering the confiscation order....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
