M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition a prayer has been made for issuance of a direction upon the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 88,417.35 seized from the Saving Bank Account No. 6517/39 and also to release the aforesaid Bank Account No. 6517/39.
(2.) PETITIONER 's case, inter alia, is that he is a retired employee of Heavy Engineer Corporation Ltd., Ranchi. Certain benefits on retirement were received by the petitioner and the same was deposited in the aforesaid Bank Account maintained with the State Bank of India, Booty More, Ranchi. The petitioner was also assessed to tax with the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 5, Ranchi and there is not dispute in so far as his assessments are concerned. It is stated that the petitioner is father -in -law of Dr. Birsa Oraon who is a named accused in the Animal Husbandry Scam, Government of Bihar. It is stated that a search and seizure operation was carried out in the office of Dr. Birsa Oraon and the aforesaid Bank Account was found in the office of Dr. Birsa Oraon. On the "basis of the aforesaid seizure, the amount found in the deposits were assessed as an undisclosed income in the hands of Dr. Birsa Oran. After such assessment, notice of demand was issued in the name of Dr. Birsa Oraon and the deposits lying In the. aforesaid account were attached and the same were adjusted with the tax liability of Dr. Birsa Oraon. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer, Dr. Birsa Oraon filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal being I.T.A. Nos. 317 and 318 of 2001. It is contended that the Tribunal recorded a finding that the amounts deposited in the aforesaid Bank Account were the benefits received by the petitioner on retirement. The Tribunal, accordingly, deleted the addition in respect of the deposits made In the Bank Account of the petitioner. After passing of the order by the Tribunal the petitioner made several representation for refund of the amount recovered from his Bank Account to satisfy the tax demand of Dr. Birsa Oraon. Inspite of several representations the respondents did not give effect to the order passed by the Tribunal. The petitioner therefore, contends that the action of the respondents in withholding the amount of the aforesaid Bank Account which was seized, is wholly illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent, wherein it is stated that during the course of search conducted in the case of Dr. Birsa Oraon, a pass -book in the name of the petitioner was found. It is stated that under Section 237 of the Income Tax Act 1961, if the amount of tax exceeds in a particular assessment. year, the assessee is entitled to refund of the excess amount of tax. In the instant case the petitioner has enclosed the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal passed in the case of Dr. Birsa Oraon and, therefore, the same amount cannot be refunded back to the petitioner.
(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the appeals filed by Dr. Birsa Oraon. For better appreciation the finding of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is reproduced herein below: After hearing both the sides, I find that at the time of search, cheque book and pass book were found in the house of the assessee. Even before the A.O. the assessee explained that the deposits were made by Sri. Sukra Oraon who is the father -in -law of the assessee who received the amount from the H.E.C. on V.R.S. Several documents were brought on record by the assessee before me. At Annexure -1, the service certificate issued by H.E.C. clearly shows that Sri Sukra Oraon left the service of H.E.C. after obtaining V.R.S. and the details of payment made to him with regard to Gratuity, V.R.S. Compensation, Notice Pay and G.P.F. of Rs. 3,48,811/ -. On perusal of copy of pass -book, I find that the deposits were made by Sri Sukra Oraon in the bank account. No material has been brought on record by the Revenue to controvert the aforesaid finding. Admittedly, the account was in the name of Sri Sukra Oraon. Therefore, unless a contrary fact is brought on record, it is to be presumed that the amount was deposited by him only. The assessee further explained the source from which the amount were deposited by Sri Sukra Oraon who is the father -in -law of the assessee. Therefore, the explanation appears to be reasonable. Accordingly, I direct the A.O. to delete the addition.;