Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1974 (8) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons put forward concerning them in this and the connected writ petitions are available to the petitioner in view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (Investigation). In that case section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act ), and rule 112 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter called the Rules ), under which these raids, etc., were made, were attacked as being unconstitutional. The Supreme Court repelled the said attack on the ground that section 132 of the Act as well as rule 112 of the Rules have provided adequate safeguards against abuse and were hence valid. The power to order search and seizure was vested in the highest officers of the department; the exercis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2(1) of the Act the officials of the income-tax department should have given to the petitioner a notice to produce whatever account books or other documents are needed and only after the petitioner fails to comply with the same there should have been a raid for the purpose of seizing them. To appreciate this contention, clauses (a) and (b) of section 132(1) of the Act may be read: 132. (1) Where the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner, in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that- (a) any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or under sub-section (1) of section 131 of this Act, or a notice under sub-section (4) of section 22 of the India .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... returns from year to year regularly over a period of years, his account books and other documents also being checked from year to year but it transpiring that this apparent honest assessee had invested large funds in properties and other financial bills according to information which later on found its way to the Director of Inspection. In such a situation it would be obvious that if notice to produce documents is given to the assessee he will most certainly not produce or cause them to be produced ; on the other hand, there may be danger that they may be destroyed or separated, if he has notice or even an apprehension that such a step is contemplated against him. In the present case, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Shri R. L. Malhotra, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat the search and seizure were made maliciously and for collateral purposes. The reasons in support of the said allegations are stated in paragraph 26 of the petition. None of the grounds mentioned therein, even on the face of them, establish any mala fides on the part of the officials ordering the searches and seizure or conducting the search and effecting the seizures. There is no substance at all in the grievance that a copy of the warrant of authorisation was not supplied to the petitioner. In the light of this expressed grievance the Income-tax Officer has sworn that the warrant of authorisation was shown to one Ashok Kumar, works-foreman, before the search started, that it was shown to the petitioner also on arrival at the factory an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dentification were placed on any books of accounts or other documents seized. Such a kind of irregularity as referred to is not sufficient to invalidate the search in view of the above-said decision of the Supreme Court. No attempt ever was made before me to specifically refer to any of the grounds mentioned in para. 26 of the petition in support of the attack of mala fides except the allegation made in the petition pertaining to a former employee (H. S. D. Gupta) of the petitioner having been dismissed on March 23, 1971, and his having filed complaints to the income-tax department as well as to the further threats held out saying that he was known to many Income-tax Officers and that he was related to a few of them, with whose help he coul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates