- (1.) BY this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks directions to release the jewellery that was seized on 8th Sept., 1981, re-refund amounts claimed by the petitioner and further to release the saving bank accounts.
(2.) THE cash, jewellery and the bank accounts were seized in a search and seizure operation conducted against the petitioner on 8th Sept., 1981. This writ petition was filed on 25th May, 1995 and the learned counsel for the respondents has filed an application in December, 1995 stating therein that the properties in question have since been released by orders dt. 11th Oct., 1995, 14th Nov., 1995 and 1st Dec., 1995, and that, therefore, this writ petition has become infructuous.
(3.) SHRI V.B. Upadhayaya, the learned counsel for the petitioner, does not dispute the release of the seized goods. However, he contends that the interest on the amount seized is payable to the assessee in accordance with the various provisions under the IT Act, 1961 including S. 132B(4). He also pointed out that in this case the assessment order that was made initially was subsequently set aside by the appellate authority, and thereafter no assessment was made, meaning thereby that no liability for tax was determined.;