9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (10) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only if it is established that the condition precedent for issuance of a search warrant is not satisfied and in the course of search, the search party has acted in material irregularities/violated the procedure prescribed so as to vitiate the search – petitioner could not succeed in establishing so - appeal dismissed X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue summons exhibit P3 and to enforce the same. Counsel also submitted since the action of the investigation wing retaining the books, etc., is illegal, the entire search and seizure proceedings evidenced by exhibits P1 and P2 series of panchanamas are illegal and therefore of no consequence and any attempt at block assessment under Chapter XIV-B would be unauthorised and illegal. The learned single judge found no reason to interfere with the search operations and disposed of the writ petition recording the submission of the Revenue that the second respondent would prepare the appraisal report and forward the file to the assessing authority for follow up action. The petitioner is aggrieved by the non-consideration of the various grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ork of post search enquiries and preparation of appraisal report. Counsel submitted that the second respondent is an Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the case as per the orders issued under section 120(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Kochi. The authorised officers in this case, i.e., the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Alleppey, and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Kollam, have handed over the seized documents as per the panchanama to the Assistant Director of Income-tax (Investigation)-I, Ernakulam, who is an Assessing Officer as per section 2(7A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The works relating to post search enquiries and appraisal report have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -tax (Investigation), Kochi. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Alleppey, and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle, Kollam, have handed over the seized documents as per the panchanama to the Assistant Director of Income-tax (Investigation)-I, Ernakulam, who is an Assessing Officer as per section 2(7A) of the Act and an authorized officer. The works relating to post search enquiries and appraisal report have been entrusted to the Assistant Director of Income-tax (Investigation)-II, Ernakulam, who is also an Assessing Officer as per section 2(7A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Director of Income-tax (Investigation), Kochi. He has been assigned with the jurisdiction under order issued under section 120(2) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner of Income-tax, Circle (2), Range II, a copy of the letter dated December 3, 2004, has been produced along with the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent as exhibit R2(d). Hence the legal custody of the document seized was always with the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2(2), from December 2, 2004, and with the second respondent. Seized documents were returned at the request of the second respondent only for the limited purpose of preparation of appraisal report. In the Madras case in K.V. Krishnaswamy Naidu and Co. v. CIT [1987] 166 ITR 244 affirmed by the Supreme Court the legal custody of the documents was always with the Assistant Director. That being the situation the facts of the Madras case are distinguish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
