TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1975 (7) TMI 67
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to appear in some cases before this court including a part-heard case in which he was to represent the Punjab State and the Punjab State Electricity Board, but he was ordered by respondent No. 3 not to leave his premises. The reason given was that the latter had been ordered by his superior officers in that behalf. 3. The son of the petitioner, Shri Kapil Sibal, advocate, was coming by air from Delhi and the wife of the petitioner was preparing to leave by car to receive him but she was also not allowed to leave the house. 4. Shri Gurdial Singh Mann, a retired P. C. S. officer, and his wife had been staying with the petitioner for the last 415 days, because the father of the former was lying ill in the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (P.G.I.), Chandigarh. They had been lodged in the guest room of the house in which their luggage was also kept. Shri Mann wanted to leave the premises for some work but the raiding party did not allow him to do so. 5. The search of the premises was commenced at about 8-30 a.m. and it concluded at about 5-30 p.m. The raiding party also wanted to make a search of the luggage of Shri Mann and his wife to which Shri Mann ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... unseized mentioned in the notice. 9. On November 6, 1974, the petitioner submitted a reply to this notice stating therein that a search warrant could be issued only if the Commissioner or the Director of Inspection had information or reasons to believe that any person had in his possession money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles, which represented wholly or partly income or property which had not been disclosed for the purposes of the Act. He also requested that he should be furnished information in the possession of the authorities as to how any of the articles represented undisclosed income of a particular year. Further, he contested the value put on these articles by the department. The other plea raised was that the notice was issued with a view to conducting a fishing enquiry by placing burden on the assessee to prove everything, which was not the intention of the legislature as manifested in section 132 of the Act. Towards the end, it was submitted : "In order to enable me to give a satisfactory reply to this notice, it is requested that the information asked for may kindly be supplied to me within a week. " 10. On November 12, 1974, respondent. N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was submitted that these items constituted stridhan of Mrs. Sibal and had been given to her at the time of her marriage by her parents and parents-in-law. Some explanation about the timber and electric fittings and other articles was also given. Towards the end, it was stated that since the acquisition of all the assets had been duly explained, the sum of Rs. 10,000 seized from his possession might be refunded or adjusted against the next instalment of advance tax payable by his client. 12. On January 6, 1975, Shri Brij Mohan Khanna, advocate of the petitioner, addressed another letter (annexure " P-10 ") to the Income-tax Officer, in which it was stated that since the department had not asked for further clarifications, it was presumed that they were satisfied with the reply. It was further averred that if any inference adverse to the interests of the petitioner was to be drawn on the basis of the information supplied by him and the statement made by him, the same may be brought to his notice so that he may be able to satisfy the authorities by adducing evidence, if necessary. The learned counsel also demanded a reasonable opportunity of being heard and reserved his right to ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d further proceedings in the matter. On the following day, a news item appeared in the Daily Tribune to the effect that this court had stayed further proceedings in the matter. On January 17, 1975, the petitioner received a registered envelope from the office of respondent No. 4, which appeared to have been despatched from Patiala. The envelope contained an order passed by respondent No. 4 on January 14, 1975, at Camp Patiala with the approval of respondent No. 1. It was prayed that since this order had been passed in disregard of the injunction issued by this court, the same should be quashed. In support of the allegations made in this civil miscellaneous petition, the petitioner filed his own affidavit and an affidavit sworn by Shri S. C. Sibal, advocate. 18. This petition and the main case came up for hearing before my Lord the Chief justice and Verma J. on January 20, 1975. On that day, the learned counsel for the respondents fairly and frankly conceded that in view of the facts disclosed in the affidavits of the petitioner and Shri S. C. Sibal, advocate, the order might be annulled. The Bench ordered accordingly. The Bench also made some observations about the departmental ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... then asked his full name and conveyed it an telephone to the superior officer. Within about half an hour, a warrant of search against him was also received but the actual search was started after lunch. He has also asserted that there could possibly be no information against him with respondent No. 1 justifying the issuance of the search warrant. 20. Respondent No. 4 filed the main return to the petition on February 11, 1975. It was denied that the petitioner was disallowed to leave the premises. He was only requested to be present at the time of the search and he agreed to the request. It was also denied that the wife of the petitioner was disallowed to receive her son at the airport. It is further submitted that the car of the petitioner was allowed to go to the airport, to bring his son. The placing of unnecessary restrictions on the movements of Shri Mann were also denied. It was further averred that since the room occupied by Mrs. and Mr. Mann was a part of the house of the petitioner, the luggage placed in that room had also to be checked up. In spite of the aggressive attitude of Mr Mann, no insult was meted out to him or to his wife. Regarding the search warrant issued ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e wholly irrelevant so far as the disposal of this writ petition is concerned." 21. In paragraph 26 of the written statement it has been specifically stated that proceedings under section 132 were initiated by Shri M. K. Dhar. 22. The plea of the petitioner in paragraph 13 that respondent No. 1 had issued the impugned warrant without any basis has been controverted in the following terms : "It is incorrect to say that the issuing of the warrant of authorisation against the petitioner was in furtherance of what is mentioned as 'a matter of policy'. In fact, information was received by respondent No. 1 that the petitioner had not been disclosing his correct income for the purposes of the Income-tax Act. It was further reported that the petitioner possessed undisclosed assets and thus was systematically evading payment of tax. He was following a systematic course whereby his wealth was considerably understated. It was also reported that the petitioner had in his possession money, bullion, jewellery and other valuable articles and things which represented income or property which were not disclosed for the purposes of the Income-tax Act. For some time pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... It has also been asserted that the petitioner was afforded full opportunity to prove his case but he failed to adduce any satisfactory evidence explaining the nature of his possession and the sources of his acquisition of the various goods found in his residential house. Further more, the proceedings under section 132(5) of the Act being time-bound proceedings, the petitioner was himself trying to prolong them so as to make it impossible for respondent No. 1 to finish them in time. It was admitted that the premises of the lawyers were searched at various places on the same day but it was also asserted that on this ground alone the searches could not be held to be indiscriminate. 24. The affidavit sworn by respondent No. 1 gives the following account of the circumstances under which the luggage of Shri Gurdial Singh Mann was searched : "However, at the time of recording his reasons for the search of the premises of the petitioner, the deponent had information that Shri Gurdial Singh Mann was staying with the petitioner. The information was further to the effect that there was a close inter-connection between the petitioner and Shri Mann. The Commissioner was, therefore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disclosing his correct income for the purpose of the Income-tax Act. It was further reported that the petitioner possessed undisclosed assets and thus was systematically evading payment of tax. He was following a systematic course whereby his wealth was considerably understated. It was also reported that the petitioner had in his possession money, bullion, jewellery and other valuable articles and things which represented income or property which were not disclosed for the purpose of the Income-tax Act. For some time past tax evasion by business community and professionals like doctors, advocates, etc., has been engaging the attention of the department. A close watch was being kept regarding the business activities and professional income and the returns made and assessments finalised in the past. A careful analysis of this information was duly processed in the intelligence wing in the office of the deponent. Material was collected and facts were sifted. Thereafter, the matter was discussed with the various high functionaries working at various places in the charge of the deponent. After carefully going into the matter, the deponent was satisfied that immediate action was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... recovered and seized under a separate panchnama. 29. In the course of arguments, one question of fact cropped up whether Shri Gurdial Singh Mann was actually residing in the house of the petitioner on October 7 and 8, 1974. The record of the Commissioner of Income-tax reveals that information was conveyed to him on October 7, 1974, that Shri Gurdial Singh Mann was living as a guest with the petitioner. A reference has already been made to the affidavit of Shri Mann in which he had affirmed that he never lived in the house of the petitioner prior to October 14, 1974, and as a matter of fact he had been living in the M.L.As. Hostel (Haryana) with effect from October 2 to October 11, 1974. Shri G.S. Mann is stated to have some links and connections with the petitioner. We were of the view that if Shri Mann had not been living with the petitioner on October 7 and 8, 1974, the relevant entries in the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax about this point would have to be looked upon with a certain amount of suspicion. The learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to our notice a photostat copy of the relevant entry in the register, exhibit CW-I, maintained at the M.L.As.'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on before him for ordering action under section 132 of the Act. It is also asserted that the record depicted the correct picture and no part of it was altered or forged. 33. In order to appreciate the points of law involved, it becomes necessary to notice the following portions of section 132 of the Act : "132. (1) Where the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner, in consequence of information in his possession, has reason to believe that-- (a) any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section 37 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or under sub-section (1) of section 131 of this Act, or a notice under sub-section (4) of section 22 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or under sub-section (1) of section 142 of this Act was issued to produce, or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents has omitted or failed to produce, or cause to be produced, such books of account or other documents as required by such summons or notice, or (b) any person to whom a summons or notice as aforesaid has been or might be issued will not, or would not, produce or cause to be produced, any books of account or other documents which will be us....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proval of the Commissioner,-- (i) estimating the undisclosed income (including the income from the undisclosed property) in a summary manner to the best of his judgment on the basis of such materials as are available with him ; (ii) calculating the amount of tax on the income so estimated in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or this Act ; (iii) specifying the amount that will be required to satisfy any existing liability under this Act and any one or more of the Acts specified in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 230A in respect of which such person is in default or is deemed to be in default, and retain in his custody such assets or part thereof as are in his opinion sufficient to satisfy the aggregate of the amounts referred to in clauses (ii) and (iii) and forthwith release the remaining portion, if any, of the assets to the person from whose custody they were seized : Provided that if, after taking into account the materials available with him, the Income-tax Officer is of the view that it is not possible to ascertain to which particular previous year or years such income or any part thereof relates, he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Code, to the searches and seizures by virtue of sub-section (13) of section 132 of the Act, the taxpayer has been provided with important safeguards against arbitrary action. These safeguards, according to the observations made by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Ramkishan Shrikishan Jhaver, are : " (i) The empowered officer must have reasonable grounds for believing that anything necessary for the purpose of recovery of tax may be found in any place within his jurisdiction, (ii) He must be of the opinion that such thing cannot be otherwise got without undue delay, (iii) He must record in writing the grounds of his belief, and (iv) He must specify in such writing so far as possible the thing for which search is to be made. After he has done these things, he can make the search. These safeguards, which in our opinion apply to searches under sub-section (2), also clearly show that the power to search under sub-section (2) is not arbitrary. 36. Even if the above matters are not expressly mentioned in section 132(1) of the Act, they have assumed statutory character by the force of sub-section (1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tely returned to him. Even with regard to the books of account and documents seized, their return is guaranteed after a reasonable time. In the meantime the person from whose custody they are seized is permitted to make copies and take extracts. Sixthly, where money, bullion, etc., is seized, it can also be immediately returned to the person concerned after he makes appropriate provision for the payment of the estimated tax dues under sub-section (5), and, lastly, and this is most important, the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code relating to search and seizure apply, as far as they may be, to all searches and seizures under section 132. Rule 112 provides for the actual search and seizure being made after observing normal decencies of behaviour. The person in charge of the premises searched is immediately given a copy of the list of articles seized. One copy is forwarded to the authorising officer. Provision for the safe custody of the articles after seizure is also made in rule 112. In our opinion, the safeguards are adequate to render the provisions of search and seizure as less onerous and restrictive as is possible under the circumstances. The provisions, therefore, relat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... law and only for the purposes for which the law authorises it to be exercised. If the action of the officer issuing the authorisation or of the designated officer is challenged, the officer concerned must, satisfy the court about the regularity of his action. If the action is maliciously taken or power under the section is exercised for a collateral purpose, it is liable to be struck down by the court. If the conditions for exercise of the power are not satisfied the proceeding is liable to be quashed. But where power is exercised bona fide, and in furtherance of the statutory duties of the tax officers any error of judgment on the part of the officers will not vitiate the exercise of the power. Whether the Commissioner entertains the requisite belief and for reasons recorded by him authorises a designated officer to enter and search premises for books of account and documents relevant to or useful for any proceeding under the Act, the court in a petition by an aggrieved-person cannot be asked to substitute its own opinion whether an order authorising search should have been issued. Again, any irregularity in the course of entry, search and seizure committed by the officer acting ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that any person is in possession of money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing which represents undisclosed income or property. The condition precedent to the exercise of the power to issue authorisation for search and seizure is that the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner must have the requisite reason to believe in consequence of information in his possession. The power to authorise search and seizure is hedged in by the requirement of this condition precedent and it is only if this condition is fulfilled that the power can be exercised. Of course, it is for the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner to be satisfied that there is reason to believe and the court cats not sit in appeal over the decision of the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner regarding the existence of the reason to believe nor can the court examine the adequacy of the grounds on which the reason to believe entertained by such officer is based. But there is a limited area within which the reason to believe entertained by the Director of Inspection or the Commissioner can be scrutinised by the court. This area now stands clearly demarcated by several decisions of the Supreme C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....har and Orissa. He does not mention the facts contained in those communications. All that he says is that from those communications 'it appears that these persons (alleged creditors) are name-lenders and the transactions are bogus'. He has not even come to a prima facie conclusion that the transactions to which he referred are not genuine transactions. He appears to have had only a vague feeling that they may be bogus transactions. Such a conclusion does not fulfil the requirements of section 151(2). What that provision requires is that he must give reasons for issuing a notice under section 148. In other words he must have some prima facie grounds before him for taking action under section 148." We are not satisfied that the Income-tax Officer had any material before him which could satisfy the requirements of either clause (a) or clause (b) of section 147. Therefore, he could not have issued a notice under section 148. Further, the report submitted by him under section 151(2) does not mention any reason for coming to the conclusion that it is a fit case for the issue of a notice under section 148. We are also of the opinion that the Commissioner has mechanically ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a matter for the court to investigate. In other words, the sufficiency of the grounds which induced the Income-tax Officer to act is not a justiciable issue. It is of course open for the assessee to contend that the Income-tax Officer did not hold the belief that there had been such non-disclosure. In other words, the existence of the belief can be challenged by the assessee but not the sufficiency of the reasons for the belief. Again the expression 'reason to believe' in section 34 of the Income-tax Act does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction on the part of the Income-tax Officer. The belief must be held in good faith : it cannot be merely a pretence. To put it differently, it is open to the court to examine the question whether the reasons for the belief have a rational connection or a relevant bearing to the formation of the belief and are not extraneous or irrelevant to the purpose of the section. To this limited extent, the action of the Income-tax Officer in starting proceedings under section 34 of the Act is open to challenge in a court of law. 48. From the cases decided under section 34 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and section 147 of the Act, additi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es an indication that this section is intended to apply in limited circumstances to persons of a particular bent of mind, who are either not expected to co-operate with the authorities for the production of the relevant books or who are in possession of undisclosed money, bullion and jewellery, etc. Take for instance, a particular assessee who has utilised his undisclosed income in constructing a spacious building. His premises cannot be subjected to a search under this section on this score alone. A search would be authorised only if information is given to the Commissioner of Income-tax that such a person is keeping money, bullion, jewellery, etc., in this building or elsewhere. Further, if an assessee has been regularly producing his books of account before the assessing authorities who have been accepting these books as having been maintained in proper course of business, it would be somewhat unjustified use of power on the part of the Commissioner of Income-tax to issue a search warrant for the production of these books of account unless of course there is information to the effect that he has been keeping some secret account books also. He has to arrive at a decision in the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with the petitioner, on October 7, 1974. A reference has already been made to the affidavits sworn by Shri Mann, the petitioner and the respondents on this point. The evidence led on the point may now be examined. 53. Shri M. R. Minhas, C.W. 1, is working as a clerk in the office of the Haryana Tourism Department, Chandigarh, since 1967. He brought the visitor's register in court and stated on oath that Shri Gurdial Singh Mann occupied room No. 7 with effect from October 2 to October 11, 1974. He paid Rs. 63 as rental charges for the occupation of this room for 9 days. Entry No. 1736 made in the register was signed by Mr. Mann in his presence. He gave a receipt for the sum of Rs. 63 paid by Shri Mann, a photostat copy of which is exhibit C. W. 1/2. He was allowed to be cross-examined by Mr. Awasthy, the learned counsel for the respondents. In cross-examination, this witness has stated that Mahant Ram, watchman of the hostel, stated before him that he knew that Shri Gurdial Singh Mann was Shri Hardwari Lal's man and on this account the room was allowed to be occupied by him. When questioned whether he could tell the time when Shri Mann arrived at the hostel, the witness ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was particularly asked whether he could exclude the possibility of Mr. Mann having visited his friends in Chandigarh outside the hostel during those days. The witness answered that Mr. Mann was in fact so much worried in those days that he did not feel like going anywhere except being in the hostel or in the hospital. Since the witness tried to ensure that he could be of maximum help to him, he remained with him during most of the days. 56. A perusal of this evidence shows that Shri Hardwari Lal, M.L.A. stayed in the M.L.As.' Hostel from August 25, 1974, to October 24, 1974. Through his good offices, Shri Mann was allowed to occupy room No. 7 with effect from October 2 to October 11, 1974. The statement made by Shri Hardwari Lal, P.W. 2, leaves no doubt in our mind that during this period Shri Mann remained with him for most of the period either in the M.L.As.' Hostel or in the hospital. He, is duly corroborated on all material particulars by Shri M.R. Minhas, C.W. 1, and Shri Mahant Ram, P.W. 1, apart from the authentic documentary evidence referred to above. On May 5, 1975, we had particularly asked Mr. Awasthy, the learned counsel for the respondents, whether he would....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Income-tax Act, 1961, was issued by the Deputy Director of Inspection/Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax/Assistant Director of Inspection/ Income-tax Officer to Shri Gurdial Singh Mann on 17-10-1974 to produce, or cause to be produced, books of account or other documents specified in the relevant summons or notice and he has omitted or failed to produce, or cause to be produced, such books of account or other documents as required by such summons or notice ; * * * * * Sarvshri/Shri/Shrimati Gurdial Singh Mann are in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery, or other valuable article or thing and such money, bullion, jewellery, or other valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been disclosed for the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or the Income-tax Act, And whereas I have reason to suspect that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing have been kept and are to be found at House No. 29, Sector 5, Chandigarh. This is to authorise and require you, Shri R. K. Bali, I.T.O........ 8th October, 1974. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ural and false. Had there been any information in possession of respondent No. 1 about the fact that Shri Mann had been residing at the premises of the petitioner prior to October 7/8, and had there been any doubt about the activities of Shri Mann, respondent No. 1 would have certainly handed over to respondent No. 2 a warrant complete in all respects for conducting the search of the luggage belonging to Shri Mann. The only legitimate inference which can be drawn from these circumstances is that the record has been falsely prepared to justify the action taken against Shri Mann. 59. The plea that respondent No. 1 did not act improperly by entrusting a blank signed warrant to respondent No. 2 with authority to him to insert the name of Shri Gurdial Singh Mann therein for pressing it into service for searching the luggage of Shri Mann, if an eventuality arose is also devoid of any force. Rule 112 of the Rules framed under the Act expressly provides that the authorisation to make a search and seizure issued by the Commissioner shall be in writing under his signatures and bearing his seal. This rule implies that the authorisation should be complete in all respects before the Commissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is of some tangible information or pursuant to a policy decision. File No. II, marked by us, relating to searches and seizures--doctors and advocates--starts with the following note : " The matter of action against Patiala lawyers was discussed with S/Shri Kulkarni and Sharda, I.A.Cs. when the A.D.I. was present. It was learnt that large-scale tax evasion was being practised by them as most of them were submitting estimated incomes and no accounts or fee-books or briefs to support the gross receipts were maintained. They were also living in a good style and had assets which were not disclosed to the department and which according to both the I.T.O./I.A.Cs. were not to be disclosed by them unless action u/s 132 was taken against them. A.D.I. has been asked to process these cases with others at Chandigarh/Ludhiana/Ambala/Rohtak ranges where this matter has already been discussed with the I.A,Cs. and they are submitting proposals (except I.A.C., Rohtak, who handed it over to me on 28-9-1974, and the proposal of I.A.Cs. at Patiala). A.D.I. should also prepare separate folders for the professional persons for different ranges, where authorisations, etc., may be kept along wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision to initiate action was taken before there was any evidence on the point and the Assistant Director of Intelligence was asked to hunt out evidence for this purpose. A complete go-by was given to the safeguards formulated by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Ramkishan Srikishan Jhaver. 66. The next development relevant to this case is the proposal dated October 7, 1974, made by respondent No. 2. It is a part of file No. 1 marked by us and appears to have been placed in that file pursuant to the directions of respondent No. 1 to the Assistant Director of Intelligence asking him to prepare separate folders for professional persons for different ranges. It reads as under : " Proposal for action u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Whereas I have reason to believe that the undermentioned persons, all Punjab leading advocates of Chandigarh, practising in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, and the Supreme Court of India at New Delhi, are not showing their total income correctly from year to year, but are understating the same and whereas they also have in their possession money, bullion, jewellery and ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arched come what may. 68. On page No. 5 of file No. 1 marked by us, the names of the petitioner and is four sons are mentioned. One of them is said to be a Deputy Secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat, the second is working as joint Textile Commissioner, Bombay, the third is a Deputy Secretary, Foreign Affairs, and the 4th is working as an advocate in the Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court. His wife is stated to be in I.F.S. Respondent No. 1 had noted in the margin that as regards the sons he would like to consider the matter further only when further information is available. Down below there is another note which reads as under : "Discussed with I.A.C. who is Gurdial Singh Mann to Shri H. L. Sibal ? Is he one of the name-lenders or a person who is helping Shri Sibal in divesting of his income surreptitiously and thus evading I.T./W.T., etc 69. The original record of file No. 1 shows that respondent No. 2 had given the date as October 8, 1974, and had later on changed it to October 7, 1974. The important thing, however, is that at that time respondent No. 1 himself was not certain about the activities of Shri Mann. The authorised officer was being direct....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....remises of Shri H. L. Sibal to guard against removal of valuables (including documents) from Shri Sibal to his portion of the house as well as his own material of unaccounted valuables and documents. Sd. S. N. Mathur, 7-10-74." 72. Respondent No. 1 has nowhere mentioned in the above order with regard to any specific matter mentioned in section 132(1)(a), (b) or (c) that he was satisfied on the basis of any information received by him. Did he want the authorised officer to recover books of account or bullion and money, etc., or both, and which thing from which of the persons mentioned ? The whole thing is as vague as can be. He merely acted on the proposal which in turn contains the mere conclusions of his subordinates instead of the necessary facts constituting information. By acting upon the conclusions arrived at by his subordinates instead of coming to his own conclusions, he has practically abdicated his statutory functions in their favour. This course is wholly unknown to law. 73. At page No. 6 of file No. 1 some figures showing the returns submitted by the petitioner during the last five years and wealth-tax returns for two years have been scribed with the foll....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion on information. At best, the information was derived from the returns submitted by the petitioner and even then returns were not properly scrutinised for judging the validity and reasonability of the conclusions drawn. As a consequence of the search, the petitioner was found to be in possession of, cash which was quite commensurate with his position and status as a leading advocate. Even though the authorised officer was satisfied that money was to be seized, yet Rs. 10,000 were retained at the instance of respondent No. 2 on the basis of some instructions issued by the superior officers. On this point, we may observe that the petitioner's allegation that Rs. 10,000 bad been seized on the orders issued by respondent No. 2 has not been denied either by Shri R. K. Bali, the authorised officer, or respondent. No. 2, even though they did file affidavits in court on some other points. The sum of Rs. 10,000 had been seized because in the absence of any seizure no order under section 132(5) of the Act could be passed. The petitioner had been making, repeated requests for being supplied the information on the basis of which action under section 132(5) of the Act was contemplated an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....seizure of Rs. 10,000 is not legal, no enquiry could be held against the petitioner under section 132(5) of the Act. 75. Towards the fag end of the arguments, Mr. Awasthy prayed that even if we allow the petition we should allow the respondents to keep the record for a reasonable period for allowing them to inspect the same. This record remained with the respondents till at least the date when the present petition was filed. Failure on the part of respondents to inspect the same shows the scant respect they had for the merits of the case. 76. In any event no provision of law has been brought to our notice authorising the retention of seized documents by the respondents after action taken against an assessee under section 132 of the Act is quashed. On the other hand, rule 112B of the Rules lays down that if proceedings under section 132(5) of the Act culminate in favour of an assessee the articles seized have to be returned to the person from whose custody they were seized. 77. For the reasons mentioned above, we quash the warrant dated October 8, 1974, issued by respondent No. 1 for conducting search of the premises of the petitioner, and the proceedings pending against hi....