https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39333 The court upheld the legality of the authorization issued by the Director of Inspection for search and seizure, finding the information available to be sufficient. It determined that the acts of the authorized officers did not constitute a seizure under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act but were done under section 132(3) for compliance. The search and seizure acts were deemed legal, with no evidence of extraneous influence. The search of the portion of the premises occupied by Shri Prithvi Raj Jindal was also found to be lawful. The court directed the restoration of the items seized to Shri Om Parkash Jindal within 10 days, allowing the officers to proceed further if warranted. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:33:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39333 The court upheld the legality of the authorization issued by the Director of Inspection for search and seizure, finding the information available to be sufficient. It determined that the acts of the authorized officers did not constitute a seizure under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act but were done under section 132(3) for compliance. The search and seizure acts were deemed legal, with no evidence of extraneous influence. The search of the portion of the premises occupied by Shri Prithvi Raj Jindal was also found to be lawful. The court directed the restoration of the items seized to Shri Om Parkash Jindal within 10 days, allowing the officers to proceed further if warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 17 Jul 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39333