ROOP Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard ShriSubhamAgrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners. ShriSambhu Chopra appears for the Income Tax Department.

(2.) THE petitioners in these writ petitions have prayed for directions in the nature of certiorari to quash the illegal search and seizure operation dated 27th/28th October, 2005 and 14th November, 2005 by the Income Tax Department under Section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). They have also prayed for releasing the cash and jewelery found in locker and house-cum-clinic, provide copy of computer data containing medico legal records, and title deeds of property already disclosed in the income tax return.

(3.) THAT on 27.10.2005 search and seizure operations were carried out at his residence-cum-clinic in the premises of the petitioner opposite N.A.S. college, E.K. Road, Meerut. The warrant of authorisation was prepared in the name of the petitioner and his wife Dr.Sangeeta. It is alleged that the warrant of authorisation was not given to the petitioner even though he has specifically demanded during the search operations, which was carried out for two days i.e. on 27th/28th October, 2005. A panchnama dated 28.10.2005 of search and seizure was prepared. The manner in which the search operations were carried out made it clear that the Taxing Officers had not scrutinised the past income tax records of the petitioner, before signing the warrants. The petitioner does not run his own clinic. He is working as one of the doctors of Meerut Laser and Eye Care Centre Pvt. Ltd., which is a private limited company. The inventories were prepared and various FDRs were seized, which was in the name of other family members and were duly disclosed in their income tax returns. The FDRs in the name of the petitioner and his wife are also disclosed in the returns of his wife Dr.Sangeeta. The FDRs belonging to the petitioner, his sons, HUF duly disclosed in the income tax returns were wrongly shown in the panchnama in the name of the petitioners. Rs.6,00,000.00 out of Rs.7,25,300.00 found in cash was also seized. A locker no.182 in the name of the petitioner and his mother Smt. Krishna was opened from which the cash was seized. It is stated that almost all the articles seized by the income tax authorities were shown in the income tax returns, filed along with balance sheet of the preceding assessment years.