9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (6) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. 3.. On February 7, 1996 and on February 8, 1996, search was made by respondent No. 2 of the petitioner's premises. Certain documents were seized and an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs was collected from the petitioner, vide cheque dated February 8, 1996 of the State Bank of Indore, Indore, towards penalty. After completion of the search and seizure, notice was issued to the petitioner for further scrutiny. The said proceedings are still in progress. 4.. During the pendency of these proceedings petitioner served a legal notice to the respondents, vide annexure P8 on March 26, 1996 challenging the raid, search and seizure challenging the same as arbitrary, illegal collection of tax as also authority of respondent No. 2 to make search and seizure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India. 6.. Perusal of annexure P9 dated April 3, 1996, which is a reply given by respondent No. 2 to the petitioner's legal notice clearly shows that a committee was constituted under section 45 of the Act and only after gathering sufficient material against the petitioner that tax is being evaded, order with regard to search and seizure of the petitioner's business premises was made. It has also been mentioned in the said reply that under section 45 of the Act, Commissioner is competent to delegate his powers and duties under the said Act. Sub-section (5) of section 45 of the Act contemplates the powers of the Commissioner while making search and seizure. Sub-section (6)(a) and (b) confers the powers on the Commissioner to seize all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned at the end of the said statement that he has read and understood the same and only thereafter he has put his signatures. Shri Choudhury contended that exercise of coercion and undue influence is manifestly proved as the petitioner had immediately written to the department that the cheque was obtained from him by such exercise. The petitioner has also informed the bank to stop payment of the said cheque. Consequently the cheque could not be encashed till date. 9.. Contention of the petitioner that there was no properly constituted committee and there was no sufficient material to conduct such a seizure against the petitioner, is wholly fallacious. Respondent No. 2 has categorically given details of the formation of the committee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
