9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other things while replying to question no.6 has stated that his jewellery weighing 80 grams has been kept in safe custody in the bank locker standing in the name of the petitioner. Thus this Court is unable to consider granting the relief to the petitioner in this Writ Petition nor can this Court out rightly draw a presumption as put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has to necessarily avail the remedies which are available to her under the provisions of the Act, more so in the light of the statements given by her kith and kin namely, sons, daughter and daughter-in-law. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to issue a Writ of Mandamus as sought for. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismisse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stitution of India. 5. The case of the petitioner revolves primarily on two facts:- (i) Firstly, by referring to panchanama dated 27.09.1996, which shows the list/ inventory of jewellery found/seized. (ii) Secondly, it is contended that there is no tax arrears in so far as the petitioner is concerned and the petitioner's immovable properties are said to have been released from attachment by the Income Tax Department. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner has not signed the inventory, but it has been signed by the petitioner's son, 4th respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the panchanama, wherein it has been stated in the column of items claimed to be belonging to Smt.Reginikantham W/o Late Dr.Vinodagan. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n appeal as against the said assessment order before ITAT. The appeal was allowed and the order of assessment was set aside and the assessing officer has been directed to re-do the assessment in accordance with law. 10. With regard to the jewellery found at the time of search, the 4th respondent appears to have given a statement, stating that out of the total of 3515 grams, which was found in the bank locker, which stood in the name of the Writ Petitioner, 1,600 grams belongs to the 4th respondent's wife, K.V.M.Chitra, 634 grams to the another son of the petitioner, V.Thangamani, 561 grams to the 4th respondent and 720 grams to Subasri Baskaran, 4th respondent's sister. 11. Therefore, the respondents have taken a stand that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made a claim and therefore, the jewels should be returned to the petitioner. 16. Per contra, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 referred to the statements which have been recorded from the 4th respondent and his brother, Thangamani and has relied on the answers given by the 4th respondent and his brother to the questions posed. As could be seen from the statement given by the 4th respondent on 25.05.1996 in reply to question no.30, the 4th respondent would state that out of 1,241 grams of jewels, 600 grams belongs to his wife and the remaining belongs to his sister and mother (petitioner) and it does not include the 20 grams of gold jewellery owned by his sister, apart from the 400 gms of jewellery held by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
