https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39442 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a practicing advocate, in a case challenging the search and seizure conducted by income-tax officials at his premises. The court found the search unauthorized due to lack of valid grounds and improper delegation of authority by the Commissioner of Income-tax. The seizure of jewelry under telephonic instructions was deemed illegal, leading to the quashing of the order under section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act. The court ordered the return of seized articles to the petitioner and allowed the petition with costs assessed at Rs. 200. en-us Wed, 13 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:12:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39442 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a practicing advocate, in a case challenging the search and seizure conducted by income-tax officials at his premises. The court found the search unauthorized due to lack of valid grounds and improper delegation of authority by the Commissioner of Income-tax. The seizure of jewelry under telephonic instructions was deemed illegal, leading to the quashing of the order under section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act. The court ordered the return of seized articles to the petitioner and allowed the petition with costs assessed at Rs. 200. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 13 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39442