( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned warrant of authorisation under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to restore the possession of the cash amount of Rs. 6 lakhs seized from the petitioner from his residence as well as Rs. 1,40,000 seized from his bank locker No. 66 with the State Bank of India, Brindaban Gate, Mathura. The petitioner has also prayed for a mandamus directing respondents Nos. 3 and 4 to hand over the custody of the seized material to the petitioner including the valuables seized from his residence.

( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

( 3 ) IT is alleged in para. 3 of the petition that the petitioner has been carrying on the business of manufacturing of perfumed supari under the brand name of "sweety Supari" and selling the same in his proprietary set up known as "shree Girraj Supari Traders". It is alleged that in relation to such business activities as also other sources of income, he has been regularly assessed to income-tax by the Assessing Officer at Mathura. It is alleged in para. 4 of the petition that in relation to his business activities which are within the purview of the Central Excise Act and rules made thereunder, the petitioner has been maintaining all such records as are required to be maintained under the Act and Rules and has been complying with all the requirements of the statute and has submitted returns as prescribed under the Excise Rules. It is alleged that no discrepancy was ever found by the excise authorities either in his working or in the records so maintained. In para. 5 of the petition it is alleged that apart from the records which are required to be maintained under the Act, the petitioner has been maintaining financial records in the regular course. Since the turnover of the petitioner for the entire block period April 1, 1996, to the date of the search, i. e. , December 10, 2002, exceeded the ceiling limit of Rs. 40 lakhs such records were subjected to tax audit under Section 44ab of the Income-tax Act. It is alleged that on the basis of such records the petitioner has been regularly filing his income-tax returns in accordance with the requirement of the Income-tax Act and there arose no such occasion from which it could be inferred that the petitioner has at any time avoided compliance of statutory notices, etc. During this period his turnover and taxable income is as shown in the columns which are given in para. 5 of the petition. Copies of the balance-sheet and profit and loss account as are relevant for the assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 as also the related statements showing computation of income in all these years are annexures I, IA, II, IIA, III and iiia to the writ petition. As regards the financial year 2002-03 relevant to the assessment year 2003-04, the books of account and other records had been kept in the regular course, and such books of account too disclosed a progressive trend of turnover. The petitioner had made higher payment of advance tax as per chart given in para. 6 of the petition.

( 4 ) ON December 10, 2002, simultaneously search operations were carried out at the residential premises of the petitioner as also his business premises and the place from which manufacturing activities were being carried on, in his absence. The panchanamas were prepared by the authorised officers and warrants of authorisation were issued by respondents Nos. 2 and 3. Copies of the three panchanamas are annexures V, VI and VII to the petition. On the same date, i. e. , December 10, 2002, search operation under Section 132 (1) was carried out at the residential premises of Onkar Nath Agarwal who had been working as accountant with the petitioner. True copy of the panchanama is annexure VIII to the petition. It is alleged in para. 8 of the petition that at the time of the search operation, i. e. , December 10, 2002, the residential premises of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document