- (1.) Heard Sri Pradeep Agrawal, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri D.D. Chopra for the Respondents.
(2.) The Petitioner, who is an Assessee under the Income Tax Act, challenges the search and seizure conducted by the Income-Tax Department on 9-2-2000 and also prays for release of the seized assets as well as two bank guarantees of Rs. 11,60,000 and Rs. 8,00,000 deposited by the Petitioner for release of a portion of the seized jewellery in pursuance of the orders of the Settlement Commission.
(3.) In short, the facts of the case are that on 18-7-2001, return under Section 158BC for the block period 1-4-1989 to 9-2-2000 was filed. On 17-8-2001, the Petitioner filed an application under section245C before the IT Settlement Commission, which was registered as Apple. No. 7/23/2001/3-IT. The Settlement Commission on 30-1-2002 directed the CIT (Central) to furnish report within 90 days, as required under Rule 9 of the IT Settlement Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1957. The Settlement Commission also directed that the payment be made and accordingly the jewellery be released box-wise and serial-wise. During the period commencing from 15-3-2002 to 15-6-2002, the Petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 24,00,000 and after deposit of the said amount, jewellery worth Rs. 23,92,482 kept in box Nos. 1 to 7 as per Panchnama dated 9-2-2000 was released. On 16-6-2004, the Petitioner made another application before the Settlement Commission for release of jewellery kept in box Nos. 8 to 10 and offered to furnish bank guarantee to the tune of Rs. 20,00,000. On 26-4-2007, the Settlement Commission ordered for release of jewellery on furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 20,00,000, in response to which, the Petitioner had furnished one bank guarantee of Rs. 11,60,000 and the other of Rs. 8,00,000.;