ALAY RAKESH SHAH Vs. DEPARTMENT OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is a member of one Hindu Undivided Family ('HUF' for short) i.e. Rakesh K. Shah HUF. He has prayed that the respondents i.e. the Union of India and Income Tax department be directed to pay to him a sum of Rs. 33,51,29,256/. This prayer arises in following background.

(2.) According to the petitioner, a search was carried out by the Income Tax authorities at the premises of one Shah Enterprises, a proprietary concern of Keyur P. Shah. According to the petitioner, the search warrant of authorization dated 29.11.2000 was issued in the name of i) Shah Finance; ii)Keyur P. Shah and iii)Rakesh K.Shah. These three persons/entities had no concern with either Shah Enterprise or Rakesh K. Shah HUF. Despite this, the authorities seized several cheques belonging to Rakesh K. Shah HUF drawn on Catholic Syrian Bank ('the bank' for short). On account of such seizure the cheques could not be deposited within the valid period. Subsequently, proceedings under section 158BC and 158BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) was carried out against various assessees. According to the petitioner, in absence of any search authorization against Rakesh K. Shah HUF, the documents and valuable articles could not have been seized, nor could the said assessee be subjected to proceedings under section 158BC of the Act. Despite various efforts by the Karta of the HUF Rakesh K. Shah, the department did not release the cheques. The petitioner would point out that initially complaint was filed before the Consumer District Redressal Commission, Gujarat, against the bank. The Commission however, held that the remedy of the assessee did not lie against the bank but only against the Income Tax department. Appeal filed against such judgment of the Commission failed. Subsequently also, multiple applications and representations were made by the Karta of the HUF to the Income Tax department without any success. Case of the petitioner therefore is that due to such illegal action on the part of the Income Tax authorities in seizing the cheques of the HUF, huge amounts were lost since the cheques could not be deposited in time. The petitioner has therefore raised multiple claims against the Income Tax department which include the principal amounts indicated in the cheques with interest computed at the rate of 18% per annum and also damages for such treatment meted out by the Income Tax department.

(3.) In our opinion, the petitioner cannot maintain this litigation. The petitioner is a member of HUF. His father Rakesh K. Shah was a Karta of HUF, as stated in the petition, had taken appropriate steps at the relevant time to protect the interest of the HUF. The cause of action arose way back in the year 2001. The petitioner has filed this petition in the year 2018 only on the ground that he was born in the year 1997 and therefore attained majority only recently.