S.H.A. Raza J.

1. M/s. Shyam Jewellers and its proprietor have filed these writ petitions claiming various reliefs against the Income-tax Department and the action taken by it which, according to the petitioner, is against propriety and legality and which has caused huge loss and is the result of mala fide and calculated action.

2. The first writ petition (Writ Petition No. 6218 of 1987) is against the action to seal off the petitioner's shop and the notice which has been pasted over the shop. The petitioners have prayed for issue of a writ, order or direction for quashing the order contained in annexure No. 2 to the writ petition and have further prayed for issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the first information report (annexure No. 1). In the second Writ Petition No. 22 of 1988, the original relief was for the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the opposite parties to restore the articles, etc., to the petitioners, which were seized and to declare the sealing of the shop as illegal and without jurisdiction. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the effect that the ornamental articles seized by the opposite parties were not liable to be seized ; and further for issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the authorisation to the Income-tax Officer under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Subsequently, an order under Section 132, Sub-section (5), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), was passed as a result of which the writ petition was amended and relief for quashing annexure No. 3 dated January 5, 1988, passed by opposite party No. 3 was also made.

3. It has been stated that the petitioner-firm has been carrying on business in gold and silver and has been obeying the provisions of the Excise Act and have been submitting the details of receipt or purchase of gold articles quarterly and have been maintaining all the details and have furnished them to the Excise Department. The details up to July, 1987, have already been furnished to the Excise Department and they have also complied with the provisions of the Sales Tax Act and the authorities of these Departments used to regularly visit the shop and have been carrying on their duty of screening and the petitioners have been submitting their income-tax returns regularly and have been properly maintaining their accounts. IT has been stated that, even after the search, not only the return of the previous years, but of the subsequent years were filed and the account books have been accepted and the Income-tax Department people have been making survey of the shop in the past and they have found nothing incriminating. IT has been stated that the officers of the income-tax department used to identify themselves to the person who happened to be the owner or the partner of the firm at the time of their visit. In the past, these surveys used to be maintained regularly as most of the firms/shops are subject to the payment of income-tax notwithstanding the small business. IT has further been asserted that the legal position has changed and income to the extent of Rs. 2 lakhs per year has been exempted from the payment of income-tax and as such, such cases were then not subject to survey or verification by the Income-tax Department. The petitioners have also made reference to the woes of the shopkeepers who have been harassed by the income-tax inspectors and officers and have stated that these officials have been unlawfully and illegally earning money by harassing the shopkeepers by paying visits, but by the amendment of the said provision, the earning of such persons has been badly affected as the amended provision has shortened their right to visit shops. IT has been stated that, in order to harass the petitioners and other shopkeepers unusual and unidentified visits were made by persons claiming to be officers/employees of the Income-tax Department, and, as such, a situation has arisen whereby