https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333910 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a case challenging the income tax authorities' refusal to release seized jewellery under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The judgment emphasized the petitioner's ownership rights over the jewellery as her stridhan, criticized the authorities for unjustified retention, and directed the release of the jewellery within two weeks. The court highlighted compliance with constitutional provisions and ordered the authorities to pay costs, concluding that the refusal to release the jewellery constituted deprivation of property without lawful authority. en-us Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:03:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333910 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a case challenging the income tax authorities' refusal to release seized jewellery under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The judgment emphasized the petitioner's ownership rights over the jewellery as her stridhan, criticized the authorities for unjustified retention, and directed the release of the jewellery within two weeks. The court highlighted compliance with constitutional provisions and ordered the authorities to pay costs, concluding that the refusal to release the jewellery constituted deprivation of property without lawful authority. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333910