Retention of seized cash during pending assessment was upheld, and mandamus for return was rejected on the facts.

Seized cash under the income-tax search provisions was treated as lawfully retained while assessment proceedings remained pending, because section 132(9A) was applied on the footing that the authorised officer had also acted as the assessing officer and the matter was later transferred to the jurisdictional assessing officer. The court rejected the 60-day objection on the facts and held that the cash could remain in safe custody until completion of assessment. A writ of mandamus for return of the cash was therefore not maintainable, and the seizure and retention were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized cash could be retained beyond 60 days and whether a writ of mandamus could issue for its return while assessment proceedings were pending.

Analysis: The seizure was made under the income-tax search provisions and the assessment proceedings were stated to be in progress. Section 132(9A) was applied on the footing that the authorised officer had also functioned as the assessing officer, and the matter had thereafter been transferred to the jurisdictional assessing officer. On that basis, the Court held that retention of the seized cash pending completion of assessment was not illegal or invalid. The petitioner's reliance on the 60-day contention was rejected in the facts of the case, and the amount was treated as lying in safe custody until assessment was completed.

Conclusion: The petition for return of the seized cash was not maintainable on the facts, and no mandamus could be issued; the seizure and retention were upheld.

---