M.KATJU, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari for an appropriate direction declaring as illegal the search and seizure operation conducted on 23rd Nov., 2001, by the IT Department and for a mandamus restraining the respondents from proceeding in any manner in pursuance of the said search and seizure and to release the cash of Rs. 6,33,300 and other documents, money and jewellery seized by the Department.
(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is a dental surgeon and a regular income-tax assessee and has been filing income-tax returns for the last twenty years regularly. The details of the previous six years of his gross receipts from profession, taxable income and tax paid are given in para 2 to the writ petition. A perusal of the same shows that for the financial year 2000-2001 the gross receipts were of Rs. 45,37,139. The income before depreciation was Rs. 10,46,372, the tax paid was Rs. 2,12,647. True copies of the audited balance sheets and the income-tax returns filed for the asst. yrs. 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 have been annexed as annexure I to the writ petition. These figures show a great increase in the gross receipts, as well as taxable income on which the petitioner has paid income-tax. Even for the current financial year, the petitioner has paid advance tax on the basis of gross receipt from profession estimated at around Rs. 50 lakhs. It has been stated in para 2 of the petition that for the asst. yr. 1998-99 the petitioner's case was taken up for scrutiny by the Department and except for disallowance of certain expenditure on account of personal use no concealment or undisclosed income was found by the Department. The true copy of the assessment order dt. 2nd Feb., 2001, passed by the Dy. CIt, Allahabad, is annexed as annexure II to the petition.
(3.) IT is stated in para 3 of the petition that the entire search and seizure was illegal and there was mala fide attempt to harass the petitioner who is a renowned dental surgeon of Allahabad city and is an honest taxpayer and a regular assessee. IT is submitted that none of the conditions mentioned in S. 132(1) of the Act existed which warranted the respondents to take any action under S. 132 of the Act. In para 8 of the petition it is alleged that there was no reason justifying the action under S. 132 and there could be no reason since no money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing as contemplated under cl. (c) of sub-s. (1) of S. 132 of the Act was found during the search and seizure. No such recorded reasons have been communicated to the petitioner. In para 12 of the writ petition it is stated that whatever was seized in the search operations was totally accounted for and was also duly explained to the officers conducting the search and seizure. Copies of the Panchnamas have been annexed as annexure III to the petition.;