https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353808 The court upheld the validity of the search and seizure proceedings under Section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, dismissing the petitioner's claim that the assets belonged to the company and not him personally. It also found the consequential assessment proceedings initiated under Sections 153A and 143(2) to be valid, emphasizing the petitioner had opportunities to present his case during assessment. The court declined the release of seized cash amounting to Rs. 2,76,35,500/-, stating insufficient grounds for interference. Additionally, it dismissed the writ petition, citing the availability of alternative statutory remedies and lack of grounds for intervention under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:40:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353808 The court upheld the validity of the search and seizure proceedings under Section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, dismissing the petitioner's claim that the assets belonged to the company and not him personally. It also found the consequential assessment proceedings initiated under Sections 153A and 143(2) to be valid, emphasizing the petitioner had opportunities to present his case during assessment. The court declined the release of seized cash amounting to Rs. 2,76,35,500/-, stating insufficient grounds for interference. Additionally, it dismissed the writ petition, citing the availability of alternative statutory remedies and lack of grounds for intervention under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353808