9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Deptt. : Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, A.A.G - I ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioner is a company assessed to income tax under jurisdictional income tax authority at Kolkata. He has approached this Court, inter alia, seeking return of an amount of Rs. 91,35,000/- purportedly seized by the income tax authorities. Petitioner has questioned under what authority of law the purported seizure/requisitioning of the amount belonging to the petitioner has been made. Petitioner seeks quashing of the entire requisitioning proceedings initiated by the respondent - income tax authority and for that purpose, to call for the entire records pertaining to the purported seizure/requisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, 2020 in the business premises of 8 parties amongst whom 4 did not appear or their premises were found to be closed/non-existent. In terms of Section 132 (9A) of the Act the assessment proceedings have been handed over to the Assessing Officer at Kolkata. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent department submits on instruction that the Assessing Officer is in the process of issuing notices for assessment proceedings upon the petitioner under Section 153-C of the Act and upon the other two persons namely Mr. Sanjay Agarwal and Mr. Sashi Kant Jha under Section 153A of the Act. As per his instruction, the assessment proceedings would be concluded in an expeditious manner within a time-frame and/or as may be directed by this Court. Petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h amount belongs to him. Neither Mr. Sanjay Agarwal nor Mr. Sashi Kant Jha are before us. A liquid cash whether it belongs to A or B or C cannot be determined in this proceeding. Assessment proceedings have been opened before the jurisdictional Assessing Officer of the petitioner at Kolkata in respect of the seized money. The proceedings would lead to a conclusion as to whether petitioner or any other person is its rightful claimant. This Court in writ jurisdiction is not in a position to determine a question of fact as to whom does the money belong to lawfully. Learned counsel for the respondent department has on instructions fairly stated that assessment proceedings would be concluded within a time-frame and if the assessment proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
