2023 (4) TMI 1037 - HC - Customs

Seeking direction to defreeze / unblock the petitioner s savings account (first holder of account was petitioner's wife) - Section 142(1)(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 - recovery of dues - HELD THAT - In the present case, the petitioner is the first holder of the bank account and his wife has been added as a joint holder. Although, the petitioner s wife may be able to operate the bank account, there is no material to substantiate that the funds in the said bank account belong to her. Considering that there is no dispute that proceeds of the petitioner s life insurance policy amounting to ₹10,73,343.51 were deposited in the said bank account, this Court considers it apposite to direct the respondent to unblock the account to the said extent - The UCO Bank shall, on the strength of the present order, make a payment of the said amount of ₹10,73,343.51 to the petitioner. Insofar as the petitioner s prayer for unblocking the said bank account is concerned, this Court considers it apposite to permit the petitioner to make a representation enclosing therewith evidence to the effect that although the petitioner s wife was included as a joint holder; the funds in the said bank account belong to the petitioner and the transactions in the said account are reflected in his income tax returns and not that of his wife. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the freezing of the petitioner's savings account by the respondent under Section 142(1)(d) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the subsequent petition filed by the petitioner to defreeze the account and disburse the amount deposited.

Freezing of Bank Account:
The petitioner's savings account was attached under Section 142(1)(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 for recovering dues owed by the petitioner's wife, who is the sole proprietor of a business. The attachment was based on the assumption that funds in a joint account belong to both account holders, allowing appropriation against dues payable by either holder.

Ownership of Funds:
The petitioner argued that the funds in the bank account, amounting to Rs. 10,73,343.51, were proceeds from his life insurance policy and not jointly owned. The petitioner provided evidence that the funds belonged to him, as they were directly remitted by the insurer to his account and reflected in his income tax returns, not his wife's.

Court's Decision:
The Court found merit in the petitioner's claim and directed the respondent to unblock the account and disburse the amount of Rs. 10,73,343.51 to the petitioner. The Court also permitted the petitioner to make a representation within two weeks to establish the ownership of the funds in the account, which would be considered and disposed of within two weeks thereafter.