Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether currency notes requisitioned by the Income Tax Department under Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be released by the criminal court or be ordered to remain with the department, and whether the Sessions Court was justified in interfering with the Magistrate's order granting custody to the department.
Analysis: Section 132A empowers the competent authority, on forming the requisite belief, to requisition assets that may represent undisclosed income or property and to require delivery of such assets to the requisitioning officer. Once such requisition is made and proceedings are initiated by the Department, the criminal court's power in relation to custody is limited, and the scope of inquiry under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is distinct from the statutory process under the Income-tax Act. In the absence of rival claims over the cash currency, the Magistrate was justified in placing the currency at the disposal of the Income Tax Department for further action under the Act, including assessment proceedings if necessary.
Conclusion: The Sessions Court was not justified in setting aside the Magistrate's order, and the order granting custody to the Income Tax Department was restored.
Ratio Decidendi: When assets are validly requisitioned under Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the criminal court cannot release them contrary to the statutory requisition, and its inquiry into custody is confined by the special mechanism under the Act.