https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19009 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the retention of seized articles by the Income-tax Department under section 132(5) after lawful release by the Central excise authorities was unwarranted. The court emphasized that possession and disclosure of assets during regular assessment rendered further action under section 132 unnecessary. It was established that post-assessment seizures were impermissible, directing the release of seized assets to the petitioner and nullifying the seizure authorization, while affirming the respondent's authority for recovery purposes. en-us Fri, 07 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Nov 2009 13:23:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19009 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, holding that the retention of seized articles by the Income-tax Department under section 132(5) after lawful release by the Central excise authorities was unwarranted. The court emphasized that possession and disclosure of assets during regular assessment rendered further action under section 132 unnecessary. It was established that post-assessment seizures were impermissible, directing the release of seized assets to the petitioner and nullifying the seizure authorization, while affirming the respondent's authority for recovery purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19009