Back
SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, SURENDRA SINGH I
Dipak Kumar Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Assessing Officer – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ram Narain Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the revenue.
2. Present writ petition has been filed to quash the seizure of Rs. 36,12,000/- dated 13.09.2022, effected under Section 132B(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Further relief has been sought to release the said amount detained since 01.09.2022, together with due interest payable under Section 132(B)(4) read with Rule 119 (A) of the Income Tax Rule, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits, petitioner is a jeweller. He regularly filed his income tax returns since 2012-2013. In the year 2022, he set out to acquire stock of gold jewellery for the oncoming Dushehra and Diwali festivities. He thus handed over Rs.36,12,000/- to his worker Om Prakash Bind on 31.08.2022 alongwith railway ticket requiring him to undertake the rail journey to Kolkata to buy jewellery. On 31.08.2022, said Om Prakash Bind was apprehended by the Government Reserved Police (GRP) at Railway Station, Mirzapur. In the course o
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the word 'shall' in the second proviso to Section 132B(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the determination of its mandat....
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.
Point of Law : If there is no valid order of assessment and no demand for income tax, Revenue cannot indirectly keep money on plea that there will be a demand, and, money should be allowed to be kept....
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....
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
