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 the petitioner was entitled to return of jewellery and fixed deposit receipts seized during search after the explanations offered were accepted and no tax liability was determined.
Analysis: The explanations furnished by the petitioner and her mother were accepted in the order passed under section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of the jewellery and the fixed deposit receipts. The record showed that no tax liability had been determined against the petitioner and no order authorising further retention of the accepted assets had been passed.
Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to receive back the jewellery and fixed deposit receipts, and the respondents were directed to return the assets.