9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 731X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the Income Tax Department and Crl.M.C.No.675 of 2010 is directed against the order in C.M.P.No.3834 of 2008 filed by the first respondent in the said Crl.M.C. In fact, both the aforesaid CMPs were disposed of along with C.M.P.No.3628 of 2008 as per order dated 23.6.2009 by the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Ernakulam as per Annexure-V order. The bone of contentions in these cases is 7664.5 grams of gold in the form of gold bars and ornaments seized from accused Nos.1 and 2 in the aforesaid crime, on 21.11.2008. The Intelligence Officer attached to the Department of Commercial Taxes was the petitioner in C.M.P.No.3628 of 2008. The said petitioner and the petitioner in the captioned Criminal Miscellaneous Case viz., the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "(1) 7664.5 grams of gold seized by the Railway police in crime 51/08 will be released on interim custody to the petitioner in CMP.3834/08 (Lalit Kumar Bhagchand Mehta @ Lalit B.Mehta) on condition that he shall furnish security for 90% of the value of the said gold, as per the value of gold on the date of furnishing security as guarantee for realisation of Income Tax due to the Government, if any. (2) The Income Tax Authority will have the right to realise the amount due to the Government, if any, as income tax from the said Lalit B.Mehta, from the said guarantee. (3) The release of the gold to the Lalit B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l v. State of Gujarat ((2007) 290 ITR 449 (Guj)) and Krishnagopal v. Director of Income Tax (Investigation) ((2009) 308 ITR 273 (MP)) to canvass the position that the normal practice when claim applications were filed by the Income Tax or Sales Tax Departments either under Section 451 or 457 Cr.P.C. is to release the articles seized to any of the Department unless sufficient materials prima facie establishing their ownership was produced by the other claimant. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in C.M.P.No.3644 of 2008 a specific contention has been raised by the Department to the effect that its Mumbai unit conducted a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act and prepared Annexure-III report which would r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the latter Crl.M.C. subject to the conditions in the order I do not think it necessary, at this distance of time viz., more than five years since the order, to interfere with the impugned order. I am of the view that these Crl.M.Cs can be disposed of by issuing further orders to safeguard the interest of the Department. A perusal of Annexure-V order would reveal that the court below itself made it clear that the release of gold to the first respondent in the latter Crl.M.C. would not in any way affect the power of Income Tax Authority to continue with the proceedings under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act and also the right to realise the amount due to Government, if any, as income tax from him out of the guarantee. In the said circumsta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
