9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that they are a registered Public Charitable Trust, running educational institutions and they are exempted from payment of tax under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is their case that on 12.03.2019 when their Managing Trustee was proceeding to his Bank (Indian Bank) at Pavoorchatram, to deposit a sum of Rs. 68,14,000/- belonging to their School, he was intercepted by the State Surveillance Team / Flying Squad. According to the petitioner, the Flying Squad took custody of the cash of Rs. 68,14,000/- and issued Receipt No.2 / 2019 dated 12.03.2019. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that they were issued with summons under Section 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 12.03.2019 by the Assistant Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Tirunelveli, instructing the petitioner to appear for an enquiry in his camp office on the same day. According to the Managing Trustee of the petitioner / Trust, he was directed to produce necessary proof for the seized cash. It is his case that he appeared before the Assistant Director and produced all the relevant documents / records including the monthly a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the Income Tax Department to release the cash back to the petitioner therein. 9. It is also stated by the petitioner that aggrieved by the order dated 16.05.2019 passed by the Division Bench of Patna High Court referred to supra, the Income Tax Department preferred an S.L.P and the same was also dismissed on 06.12.2019 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civil) Diary No.31538 of 2019. According to the petitioner, without authority under law, the Income Tax Department has retained the seized cash and they will have to necessarily release the same to the petitioner forthwith. 10. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents denying the allegations of the petitioner. As seen from the counter affidavit, it is their case that the claim of the petitioner will have to be investigated and only thereafter, it can be concluded whether the cash seized from the petitioner belongs to the School or it belongs to the Managing Trustee of the petitioner / Trust in his individual capacity. According to them, the Writ Petition has been prematurely filed even without waiting for the outcome of the investigation. Even though they have raised several contentions in the counter affid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the aforesaid Division Bench Judgment, also relates to the same election, when the cash was seized from the petitioner. 15. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner also drew the attention of this Court to the order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, where, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the Income Tax Department aggrieved by the aforesaid Division Bench Judgment of the Patna High Court. 16. After referring to the said decisions, the learned Senior counsel would submit that since the cash has been seized from the petitioner without authority under law and without following the Standard Operating Procedure Order issued by the Election Commission of India, the respondents will have to forthwith release the cash back to the petitioner. 17. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that the seized cash which was delivered to the respondents by the Election Commission officials, is under investigation. According to her, the Income Tax Department is yet to give a finding based on the investigation as to whether the seized cash belongs to the Managing Trustee of the Public Trust in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h (i)In order to avoid inconvenience to the public and genuine persons and also for redressal of their grievances, if any, a Committee shall be formed comprising three officers of the District, namely, (i) CEO, Zila Parishad / CDO / P.D.DRDA (ii)Nodal Officer of Expenditure Monitoring in the District Election Office (Convenor) and (iii) District Treasury Officer. The Committee shall suo-motu examine each case of seizure made by the Police or SST or FS and where the Committee finds that no FIR / Complaint has been filed against the seizure or where the seizure is not linked with any candidate or political party or any election campaign etc., as per Standard Operating Procedure, it shall take immediate step to order release of such cash etc., to such persons from whom the cash was seized after passing a speaking order to that effect. The committee shall look into all cases and take decision on seizure. (ii).The procedure of appeal against seizure should be mentioned in the seizure document and it should also be informed to such persons at the time of seizure of cash. The functioning of this committee should be given wide publicity, including telephone No. of the convenor of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the petitioner that funds which were seized as early as on 12.03.2019 are urgently required for the smooth functioning of the School run by the Charitable Trust. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the representations of the petitioner seeking for release of the seized cash will have to be considered by the respondents expeditiously. 23. For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the first and second respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 18.03.2019 requesting for release of the seized cash amounting to a sum of Rs. 68,14,000/- which was seized from the petitioner on 12.03.2019 and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the Standard Operating Procedure Order / Instructions, issued by the Election Commission of India on 29.05.2015 as well as the Hon'ble Division Bench Judgment of the Patna High Court in the case of M/s.Indian Traders Vs. State of Bihar and others made in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9941 of 2019, by giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner including granting him the right of personal hearing within a period of four weeks from the date of rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
