- (1.)This order shall also govern disposal of Writ Petn. No. 6775 of 2010, as according to learned counsel for the parties, the facts and questions of law involved in both these writ petitions are identical. For the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from Writ Petn. No. 6774 of 2010. This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred against the issuance of warrant of authorization dt. 5th March, 2010 by the first respondent under s. 132 of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the Act).
(2.)The petitioner claims and avers in paras 5.1 to 5.3 of the petition that as a result of partition, out of the larger HUF of M/s. Motilal Tejram, the present unit of HUF of M/s. Tejram Omprakash (the petitioner) had come into existence long back. In the earlier larger HUF, Karta of the present HUF Shri Omprakash Gupta, his brothers Shri Ravindra Kumar Gupta and Shri Rasnidhi Kumar Gupta were also the members. All these three brothers separated long back. The premises situated at 564/2, M.G. Road, Indore which consists of two independent buildings, namely--front building and back building having same municipal number. Out of the two separate buildings the front portion is in the occupation, possession and control of the petitioner HUF, his wife and two major sons, namely--Nitesh Kumar Gupta and Rohit Kumar Gupta and is being used by the petitioner for its electrical business which is being carried in the name and style of M/s. Basant Electricals. The same front portion of the building is being used by Shri Omprakash Gupta and his family members as their residence. As regards the backside of the said premises at 564/2, M.G. Road, Indore the same is in occupation and possession of other group of separated members of the family headed by Shri Rasnidhi Kumar Gupta, the elder brother of the Karta of the present petitioner HUF. The petitioner further claims that these two independent groups of family are not having any connection in any manner whatsoever regarding their business activities.
(3.)According to the petitioner on 11th March, 2010 at 8:30 a.m., the raiding party consisting of the officers of the IT Department appeared at the petitioner's premises and informed Karta of the petitioner HUF Omprakash Gupta that a warrant of authorization under s. 132(1) dt. 5th March, 2010 had been issued by the first respondent--Director of IT (Inv.) Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, Bhopal against M/s. Basant Electricals, the firm belonging to petitioner HUF for conducting the search and seizure. The warrant of authorization was shown to him mentioning therein that it had been issued against "K.S. City (P) Ltd., Basant Electricals" 564/2 M.G. Road, Indore. After perusal of the warrant, the Karta of the petitioner HUF explained to the officers that the warrant is not for search and seizure of its properties, but the officers paid no heed and conducted the search of the petitioner's premises. The raiding party prepared a Panchanama and seized the computers belonging to the petitioner containing the data of its account books. Thereafter even without supplying copy of the seizure memo, the raiding party unauthorizedly removed the seized property. Feeling aggrieved by issuance of warrant of authorization and the action of search and seizure, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.