TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 120 days on numerous grounds. The Court held that when an application is made for the release of assets under first proviso to Section 132B(1)(i) of the Act explaining the nature and source of the seized assets and if no dispute was raised during the permissible time of 120 days by the Revenue Department, it had no authority to retain the seized assets in view of the mandate contained in second proviso to Section 132B(1)(i) of the Act. This decision does not seem to have been challenged by the Revenue Department before the Supreme Court. For the reasons stated in the decision, we too find ourselves in complete agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench of Gujarat High Court. Thus direct the respondents to immediately release ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch under Section 132 of the Act was executed. On the contrary, the petitioners were informed vide communication dated 13.7.2015 (Annexure-22) by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Guwahati that by order dated 28.1.2015 centralization of their cases has been done with CIT (Central) 3, New Delhi and therefore jurisdiction of the office of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Guwahati had ceased. By the said communication dated 13.7.2015, the Assistant Commissioner also informed the petitioners that their application dated 26.11.2014 was treated as disposed of in the light of order dated 28.1.2015. 5. It is to be noted that the petitioners challenged order dated 28.1.2015 of the centralization of their cases with CIT (Cent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 488 dt.19.06.2015. 2. It is seen from the report of the Assessing Officer that assessee has filed application as per 1st proviso to Section 132B(1)(i) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 for release of Gold Ornaments and Jewelleries within prescribed time of 30 days of the end of the month of seized of such items. This application was not disposed off within 120 days prescribed in 2nd proviso to Section 132B (1)(i) of the Income Tax Act,1961. 3. In Para No.10 of the report dated 19.06.2015 of Assessing Officer, he has reported that he is satisfied of the nature and source of the Gold Jewellery of 15582.280 gm, Gold Bar Coin of 3.238 kg and Diamond of 34.160 cts (31 pcs) amounting to a total value of ₹ 8,23,36,841/-. 4. The As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are hereby quashed and set aside and the respondent authorities are directed to release the gold ornaments and jewellery seized by them during the course of search and seizure operation forthwith and in any case not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court or from that date of receipt of certified copy of this order, whichever is earlier. 9. In view of the decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the above referred case, your proposal for release of seized items ad mentioned in your aforementioned letter and also in the report of Assessing officer is hereby approved under 1st proviso to section 132B(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act,1961 subject to the collection of existing liability of ₹ 90,24,4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any such asset is explained] to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the amount of any existing liability referred to in this clause may be recovered out of such asset and the remaining portion, if any, of the asset may be released, with the prior approval of the [Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner, to the person from whose custody the assets were seized. Provided further that such asset or any portion thereof as is referred to in the first proviso shall be released within a period of one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the last of the authorization for search under section 132 or for requisition under section 132A, as the case may be, was executed; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
