AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 297
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Petitioner wold also pray for declaring the search of his premises as illegal and void ab initio and for return of money, bullions or other valuable items seized from his premises. 2. Challenge is thrown on the ground that there is no basis of issuance of search warrant under Section 132 of the IT Act because 'reason to believe' does not exist for issuance of the search warrant. It is also argued that there was no information in possession of the authorising officer forming the basis for the reason to believe and further that the warrant of authorisation is in the name of Amolak Singh Bhatia and Others and not against the petitioner. It is also argued that issuance of notice under Section 153A of the IT Act to a person against whom searc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions rendered in Income-Tax Officer, Special Investigation Circle- B, Meerut v Messrs Seth Brothers and Others Etc. 1969 (2) SCC 324, Pooran Mal v The Director of Inspection (Investigation), New Delhi and Others 1974 (1) SCC 345, and Dr. Pratap Singh and Another v Director of Enforcement, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and Others 1985 (3) SCC 72 and thereafter, summarise the legal position in paras 8 & 8.1 to 8.6, which are reproduced hereunder : 8. The principles that can be deduced from the aforesaid decisions of this Court which continue to hold the field without any departure may be summarized as follows: 8.1 The authority must have information in its possession on the basis of which a reasonable belief can be founded that- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ufficiency or adequacy thereof. 5. The Supreme Court, while eventually setting aside the order passed by the High Court observed further thus in paras 21, 22 & 23 : 21. In the light of the views expressed by this Court in ITO v. Seth Brothers and Pooran Mal, the above opinion expressed by the High Court is plainly incorrect. The necessity of recording of reasons, despite the amendment of Rule 112(2) with effect from 1st October, 1975, has been repeatedly stressed upon by this Court so as to ensure accountability and responsibility in the decision making process. The necessity of recording of reasons also acts as a cushion in the event of a legal challenge being made to the satisfaction reached. Reasons enable a proper judicial a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e satisfaction note(s); the alleged absence of a final decision to issue the authorization at the level of the Additional Director and the Director; the absence of any satisfaction of the Director General who, according to the High Court took the decision to issue the authorization are all seriously flawed. The different steps in the decision making process is lucidly laid down in the instructions contained in the search and seizure manual published by the department, relevant part of which has been extracted above. The steps delineated have been scrupulously followed. Besides we may take note of the fact that the Additional Director was not one of the competent authorities Under Section 132 on 8.6.2009 (date of his note) inasmuch ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Amolak Singh Bhatia group and therefore, he is proposed to be included in the search." Similar observation in respect of other liquor contractors of the State is also mentioned in the note sheet concluding that in the light of above, on the basis of information gathered during discrete enquiries, it is apparent that the Shri Amolak Singh group and his associates and Shri Manjeet Singh Bhatia and associates are concealing their true income and are in possession of substantial amount of money, bullion, jewellery and other valuable assets representing income which has not been and shall not be disclosed for the purposes of taxation. The officer thereafter proposed issuance of warrant of authorisation under Section 132 of the IT Act in resp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h would be relevant for determining the correct income liable to tax. I am, therefore, satisfied that this is a fit case for action under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act,1961. The proposal to restrict action to the main players in the highest revenue yielding districts has been made after detailed discussion with me. This has come about because of logistic/manpower problems faced by this Directorate. DGIT (Inv.) Bhopal may kindly peruse the notes on prepages and accord administrative approval for action on persons/premises mentioned at 'A' & 'B' on page 9/N. On the basis of the above note, Shri M.K. Moghe, Director General (Inv), Bhopal, accorded administrative approval on 9-3-2007. 9. Upon perusal o....