Back
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT
Vikas Kankaria S/o Shri Bhikam Chand Ji Kankaria – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J:
1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner (assessee), claiming the following reliefs:
a. entire proceedings under Section 131/132 of the Income Tax Act, including the Order impugned dated 13.05.2024 (Annexure-10) and 19.06.2024 (Annexure-11) may kindly be quashed and set aside; and
b. “reasons to believe” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 may kindly be called for, for perusal of this Hon’ble Court;
c. any further, consequential and/or other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.”
2. As the pleaded facts and the record would reveal, the petitioner (assessee) is the Sole Proprietor of the Firm M/s. K.P., and is engaged in the business of wholesale trading of gold jewelry/ornaments with purity of 18 & 22 Carat, since the year 2014, and that, there is nothing on record which could show any irregularities or
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.
Seizure of stock-in-trade under the Income Tax Act requires clear evidence of undisclosed income; mere suspicion is insufficient.
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....
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish prima facie evidence that seized goods are part of the stock-in-trade, as per Section 132(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Ac....
The statutory provision of Section 132B of the Income Tax Act is mandatory, and the time frame provided under Sections 132A and 132B is crucial in determining the retention and release of seized asse....
The court held that an application for the release of seized assets is valid even if directed to a senior officer, emphasizing the need for timely action by tax authorities to uphold citizen rights.
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
