9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndents. According to the petitioners the present value of the jewellery is about Rs. 16 lakhs. Be that as it may, block assessment proceedings were initiated against the petitioners and the admitted position is that whatever demands were raised in terms of the block assessment, the same were paid and all the liabilities discharged. The grievance of the petitioners is that notwithstanding this, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e forthwith made over or paid to the persons from whose custody the assets were seized." Our attention has also been drawn to rule 112C of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 which reads as follows :- "Any assets or proceeds thereof which remain after the liabilities referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 132B are discharged shall be forthwith made over or paid to the person, from whos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... H) ; [2004] 187 CTR 140, the Punjab and Haryana High Court took the view that jewellery that is recovered and seized cannot be retained in the absence of any existing liability or demand against the assessee. In that case, while allowing the writ petition and directing the release of the jewellery, the Punjab and Haryana High Court imposed costs of Rs. 10,000 on the Revenue. In Veena Jain v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is admittedly so, there is no reason to retain their jewellery on any of these two grounds. There is admittedly no stay granted by this court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 260A of the Act. Consequently, the respondents are obliged to give effect to the order appealed against. Under the circumstances, we allow the writ petition. The respondents will return the jewellery to the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
