1966 Supreme(Raj) 131

Rajasthan High Court
Dave, C.J. & Kan Singh, J.
Chiranjilal Shrilal Goenka - Appellant
Versus
R. Prasad, Collector of Customs - Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 269 of 1966
Decided On : May 17, 1966

Headnote:(a) Income Tax Act, Sec. 132 —Powers though drastic not arbitrary and to be exercised according to guiding principles.(b) Taxation laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1965, Sec. 8—Tender to actual of gold—Mere application or offer without tender of gold in metal not tender —Notification GOl No. 4(29) W&M/65, dated 19.10.1965—DIR, R. 126(4).(c) Income Tax Act, 1961, Secs 121, 127, 131 and 132—Jurisdiction not confined to area where same acquired with respect to a particular case.(d) Income Tax Act, 1961, Sec. 132(5)—Where seized goods claimed by another officer under another enactment ITO not barred from delivering same.(e) Defence of India Rules, R. 126-L(a)(b) Clauses to be read disjunctively—Seizure need not be from person or premises—Gold suspected to be contraband in possession of Income-tax authorities who seized it while conducting search under sec. 132 Income Tax Act may be seized under R. 126-L.(f) Defence of India Act, Sec. 43—Enactment includes any prior or subsequent enactment.(g) Income Tax Act, Sec. 132—Document evidencing debts though intangible property same are valuable articles and may be seized and may be taken into consideration in estimating the value of seized assets.

       Once the Commissioner or the Income Tax Officer acquires jurisdiction in respect of any case then they will be competent to exercise powers u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act even in respect of subsequent years concerning the particular person whose case is entrusted to them.The jurisdiction based on the entrust-ment of specified cases or specified persons cannot be said to be territorial in character. According to S. 4 of the Income-taxAct,1961, which is the charging section, income-tax is to be charged for any assessment year in respect of the total income of the previous year or year of the person concerned. Therefore, the Income-tax Officer, who has to deal with the case or cases of a particular assessee will be competent to exercise his jurisdiction in assessing the total income of that person wherever the income may have accrued or been received in the country. Powers under sec. 131 or for that matter under sec. 132 of the Income-tax Act are incidental to the exercise of the jurisdiction to assess the total income of a person and, therefore, the processes of Income-tax Authorities under sec. 131 or 132 of the Act cannot be limited to any particular area specially when the jurisdiction is not exercised on the basis of area, but on the basis of the entrustment of any case to the Income-tax Authorities in accordance with section 121 of the Income-tax Act. (Para 24)

       Sec. 132(5) casts a duty on the Income-tax Officer 10 retain sufficient assets with him as may be necessary for the meeting of the tax liability but this cannot be construed to mean that if any other competent officer, in exercise of his lawful powers under any other law, wants, to take the goods, the Income-tax Officer will not be free to handover those goods to him. Sec. 132(5) only means that the Income-tax Officer cannot, of his own accord, part with the custody of the assets seized by him, but if he has to yield to any process of law, then it cannot be said that he has done anything which may impinge on his obligation under sec. 132(5) of Income-tax Act. (Para 33)