9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner, Bapurao, an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), calls in question the two orders (annexures B and C) made by respondents Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, purporting to act under the provisions of section 132 of the Act. Pursuant to a warrant of authorisation issued by the D. I. T. (Investigation), Pune, respondent No. 1---Assistant Director of Income-tax (Investigation) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned order annexure C endorsing the order annexure B and directing retention of the said immovable properties. The petitioner has assailed the aforesaid orders as without jurisdiction. it was contended that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 had no jurisdiction under section 132 to seize or retain any immovable property as according to the petitioner section 132 in terms applies to only movables like boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r may take in exercise of his power of search and seizure under section 132(1). It authorises him to : "132. (1)(B)(i) enter and search any building, place, vessels, vehicle or aircraft where he has reason to suspect that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are kept ; (ii) break open the lock . . . . . (iia) search any person . . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) not with respect to the building or the place searched. There is absolutely nothing in section 132 which may authorise the officer to seize or retain any immovable property. In Sardar Parduman Singh v. Union of India [1987] 166 ITR 115, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has held that the "scope of section 132 was limited to articles and things mentioned in sub-section (1), the section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
