HAZARI LAL SONI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks a declaration that the search and seizure which was made under the provisions of Section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the I. T. Act"), on August 22, 1989, at the residence of the petitioner situated in Jhalawar by respondent No. 3, the Assistant Commissioner, Income-tax Department, Circle Kota, be quashed ; the order of the Assistant Commissioner made under Sub-section (5) of Section 132 on December 20, 1989 (annexure-34), as well as the order dated May 3, 1990, (annexure-35), of the Commissioner confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner be quashed ; the gold, silver and cash seized by respondent No. 3 may be ordered to be returned to the petitioner. In the alternative, it has also been prayed that so far as imposition of penalty is concerned, the order of the Assistant Commissioner as confirmed by the Commissioner deserves to be quashed.

(2.) IN seeking the aforesaid reliefs two contentions have been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner. The first contention is that before conducting the search and seizing the assets (cash, silver and gold ornaments) no satisfaction as required under Sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the INcome-tax Act of the officers mentioned therein for the reasons to believe that the petitioner was in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing represents either wholly or partly income or property which has not been, or would not be, disclosed for the purposes of the INcome-tax Act or the books of account and other documents which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceedings under the INcome-tax Act and will not be produced if the petitioner is called upon to do so was recorded and, secondly, that so far as the penalty is concerned, it could not have been imposed in the impugned order made under Section 132(5) of the INcome-tax Act and could only be made under a separate order.