Court orders return of seized silver jewellery to petitioner under Income-tax Act, emphasizing substantive rights over procedural requirements.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the return of 10 kgs. of seized silver jewellery under section 132B(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Despite the tax authority's request for a succession certificate post the adoptive father's demise, as ownership was established and uncontested, the court emphasized that procedural requirements should not impede substantive rights. The court ordered the return of the jewellery to the petitioner within two months, recognizing the petitioner's undisputed title.

---

---

Issues involved: Petition seeking direction for releasing 10 kgs. of silver jewellery seized u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Summary:
The petitioner, sharing residence and business with his adoptive father, had 10 kgs. of silver jewellery seized during a search. After various assessment orders, it was acknowledged that the seized jewellery belonged to the petitioner. However, the tax authority requested a succession certificate for return of the jewellery following the adoptive father's demise. The petitioner argued that this requirement should not apply when ownership is established. The court examined section 132B(3) of the Act, emphasizing that procedural provisions should not override substantive rights. As there was no dispute over ownership, the court directed the return of the jewellery to the petitioner within two months, ruling in favor of the petitioner's undisputed title.

---