9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 1 encashed the FDs and Rs. 72,40,330 from the bank account of the petitioner – Held that action of respondent No.1 vis-à-vis appropriation was high handed. It is not supported by any provisions of the Income-tax Act, particularly when the appropriation is sought to be made without the assessment order - respondent No. 1 had no authority to encash the FDs or withdraw the cash, from the bank acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount of the petitioner in the State Bank of India, Powai. Hereto annexed and marked as annexure I is a statement giving particulars of encashment of FDs, withdrawal of cash, seizure of bonds and seizure of FDs. In this writ petition, we are not concerned with the question whether the petitioner has undisclosed income. What is challenged is the action of respondent No. 1 in encashing the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment order. We would have taken a stricter view of the matter. However, on facts and circumstances of the case, the following order is passed: Order: (a) On or before October 23, 2002, the Department is directed bring back Rs. 17,93,58,944 into the respective accounts in the Syndic Bank, Bhandup, Thane and Powai. Similarly, the Department shall bring back Rs. 72,40,330 into the petitioner' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2, the aforestated amount of Rs. 17,93,58,944 was invested in three (3) FDs of Rs. 7,13,65,983, Rs. 5,36,73,700 and Rs. 5,43,19,261. (b) The bonds for Rs. 35,01,50,000 would continue to remain attached and that the same will not be appropriated except in accordance with law. The attachment will continue under section 132(3) of the Act. (c) Similarly, the two FDs, which the Department has seize ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
