TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 637X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty. The picture is quite hazy. The procedure under section 132B of the Act will make the picture clear. We are not convinced with the submission of Mr. Shah, that there is no clarity in the Warrant of Authorization issued under section 132A whether the case is one in which the income could be said to be not disclosed or would not have been disclosed. We had also called for the original file and after perusing the same, we were convinced that the satisfaction has been recorded based on cogent materials on record. No case is made out for review of the judgement - MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR REVIEW) NO. 1 of 2019 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3347 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 9-9-2019 - MR J. B. PARDIWALA AND MR A. C. RAO, JJ. For The PETITIONER (s) : MR JP SHAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS ASHLESHA M PATEL For The RESPONDENT (s) : MR M.R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MRS MAUNA M BHATT IA ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1.00. This is an application at the instance of the original writ applicant seeking review of the judgement and order passed by this Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r inclination to release the cash amount, which has been seized, in favour of the writ applicant subject to the writ applicant furnishing a running Bank Guarantee of any Nationalized Bank. However, Mr. Shah, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ applicant submitted that it would be too difficult for the writ applicant to furnish a Bank Guarantee of the amount of ₹ 2 Crore and odd. 3.00. The review is sought for substantially on three grounds. Mr. Shah, the learned senior counsel first invited the attention of this Court to para 5.03 of the judgement. Para 5.03 of the judgement of which review is sought for reads as under :- 5.03. Mr. Shah, submitted that there are two important phrases in section 132(A)(C) of the Act. First phrase is has not been and the second phrase is would not have been . According to Mr. Shah, as the Income Tax Return for the year during which the cash has been seized, is yet to be filed, the case would not fall within the ambit of has not been . At the same time, according to Mr. Shah, there is no material on record to arrive at the subjective satisfaction that the amount of cash would not have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt to the said warrant of authorization u/s.132A(1)(c) at page 13 of the petition and pointed out that on the facts of the case, the reason to believe has to be either (I) the cash of ₹ 2,45,50,00,000 is income, which has not been disclosed or (ii) the said cash is income, which would not have been disclosed, for the purpose of I.T. Act, 1961; whereas there is no specification whether it is No.(i) above or No.(ii) above, and therefore, this warrant of authorization is invalid because of such aforesaid nebulousness. 4.00. While deciding the main matter, we kept in mind the settled principle of law that if the action of the officer issuing Warrant of Authorization is challenged, the Officer concerned must satisfy the Court about the regularity of his action. If the action is maliciously taken or power under the section is exercised with collateral purpose, then it is liable to be struck down by the Court. If the conditions for exercise of the power are not satisfied, the proceedings would be liable to be quashed. However, where the power is exercised bona fide and in furtherance of the statutory duties of the Tax Officer, any error of judgement on the part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the Canara Bank Account No.3179214000008. The balance amount was withdrawn from my other bank accounts. Some amount was withdrawn from the bank Account of my wife namely Nina Kamlesh Shah and some amount was withdrawn from my Cash Book. 5.02. Mr. Bhatt, submitted that being not satisfied with such explanation given by the writ applicant, summons for the second time was issued under section 131 of the Act, stating as under:- Whereas your attendance is required in connection with proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961 in your own case, your are hereby required to appear personally or through an Authorized Representative to attend my office at Room No.527, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Majuragate, Surat on 18.10.2018 at 04.00 P.M., and to submit or produce the books of accounts and/or other documents specified hereunder : BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR DOCUMENTS TOBE PRODUCED 1. Name, address and ITR details of parties from whom you have received the following cash payments : Date Transaction particulars Amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
