TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 693
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bitrary, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. 2) The Petitioner herein is the 3rd Petitioner and Son of Petitioner No. 2, who is the Proprietor of 1st Petitioner, which is a Proprietorship concern. 3) On reliable information that gold rates are likely to be increased in few days, the Petitioner herein along with his brother's son and his Nephew, boarded a bus to Hyderabad for purchase of gold. As 23.02.2019 was a bank holiday, being a 4th Saturday, cash which was sought to be taken to Hyderabad could not be deposited in the bank. They carried the said cash along with them in the bus. On reaching Hyderabad, they came to know that the shops were closed, hence, they boarded Kachiguda-Chegalpattu Express on 24.02.2019 to go to Chennai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....05.2019 along with an inventory of the cash seized. Thereafter, the 3 Respondent once again issued summons to the 2nd Petitioner on 06.05.2019, calling for books of accounts for the previous three years. In response to the same, the third Petitioner addressed a letter, dated 10.06.2019, explaining the genuineness of the cash seized and consequently requested the 3rd Respondent to release the cash. It was urged that the nature of the business of the petitioners was trading in bullion of gold and silver and the cash transactions and the cash seized is out of the said business transactions. 6) On 11.06.2019, a show cause notice was issued asking the 3rd Petitioner to show cause why penalty proceedings under Section 272A(1)(c) of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e cash seized. It is stated that, only Petitioner No. 3 appeared on 05.03.2019, while Petitioner Nos. 4 and 5 appeared on 06.03.2019. The statement of the 3rd Petitioner was to the affect that, the cash seized belongs to the 1st Petitioner, which is a Proprietary concern of the 2nd Petitioner. The 3rd Petitioner also stated that, Petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 were travelling to Chennai on coming to know that the gold prices were likely to increase in a day or two. According to him, the entire amount of Rs.,1,50,00,000/- was reflected in the books of accounts of the 1st Petitioner concern. 9) Insofar as 4th Petitioner is concerned, his explanation is to the effect that, portion of cash found with him was given by 3rd Petitioner for purchase of go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. It is said that, the case is presently lying with the jurisdictional assessing officer and the Respondent No. 3 has no authority whatsoever to release the cash after it has been deposited in PD account. It is said that pursuant to the completion of such assessments, seized/requisitioned assets are dealt with as per the provisions of Section 132B of the Act. 12) The fact that a sum of Rs.,1,50,00,000/- was seized is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the amount has been deposited in PD account. The case is presently with the jurisdictional assessing officer. Section 132B of the Act states that assets seized under Section 132 or requisitioned under Section 132A may be dealt with in the following manner, namely:- 132A. (1) Wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection, shall not be disclosed to any person or any authority or the Appellate Tribunal.] 13) Further, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has also issued instructions, dated 11.12.2006, on the issue of release of cash deposited in PD account. The relevant portion of the instructions is reproduced hereunder: [Section 132B of the IT Act lays down the procedure for application and release of asses seized u/s 132 or requisitioned u/s 132A of the IT Act. As per the provisions of clause (i) of Section 132B(1), such assets have to be applied for recovery of any existing liability under the Income Tax Act, the Expenditure-tax Act, the Wealth Tax Act, the Gift-tax Act and the Interest Tax Act, 1974, and the liability determined on completio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out of the balance an amount to meet the expected liability on account of the penalty imposable. Where assessee is in appeal against the assessment order and the penalty has not been imposed up to the date of the order of the CIT (Appeals), the position regarding the amount lying in the PD Account should be reviewed at the time of giving effect to the order of the CIT (Appeals). Only such amount thereof should be retained which is sufficient to meet the expected amount of penalty imposable on the assessment as revised in appeal effect. The balance should be released within one month from the order under Section 250, after recovery of any existing demand at that time. The amount, which was retained after the assessment order or the order....