TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tory provision, the respondents cannot retain documents of title impounded/seized by them under Section 131(3) of the Act. Apart from the above, under Section 131(3) of the Act, the documents impounded can be retained in the custody of the respondents beyond 15 days only after obtaining approval of the Principal Chief Commissioner or other officers named in the said subsection. There is no case for the respondents that any such approval had been obtained by the department from any of the officers mentioned in Section 131(3) of the Act. Therefore the respondents cannot under any circumstances retain the documents of title of the petitioner. Respondents have acted illegally and with material irregularity in retaining the documents of ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his income tax returns for the financial years 2006-2007 to 2010-2011. It was pleaded that inspite of the request for return of the original document of title, and in particular, Sale Deed No.3561/2008 of Sub Registry Office, Ernakulam pertaining to his residential house, respondents have, under one pretext or the other delayed returning the document. Petitioner also asserted that respondents had informed that they misplaced the documents and that the same will be returned after tracing it out. According to the petitioner, the respondents cannot hold on to the documents indefinitely and that such an action is illegal and contrary to the principles of equality enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 3. A statement was fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment. It was further pointed out that there was no provision under law to retain documents of title of an assessee as security for amounts allegedly due. 5. I have heard Sri. P B. Subramaniam the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department and have also considered the rival contentions. 6. The document in question was seized on 17.02.2010. The respondent has no case that petitioner has any liability in respect of the assessment years prior to 2009-10. The learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department fairly conceded that there is no provision under the Act to retain the documents of title as security for any tax liability that may arise in the future. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
