(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad Range, Allahabad, dated November 24, 1978, refusing to release and return the seized assets unconditionally to the petitioner.
(2.) THE brief facts are these. THE petitioner, Bhagwat Prasad, carries on money-lending and pawning business at Jajauli in the district of Azamgarh. A search was conducted of his business premises and residence under Section 132(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, hereinafter " the Act", from October 18 to 20, 1974, and some account books, assets consisting of silver ornaments, old silver coins and Z.A.C. Bonds were seized by the income-tax authorities. THE ITO passed an order under Section 132(5) of the Act on January 13, 1975, and estimated the undisclosed income relevant for the assessment year 1975-76 at Rs. 9,05,739, tax on which was determined at Rs. 8,41,661. Another order under that provision was made on April 5, 1977, and the total concealed income for the assessment year 1975-76 was estimated at Rs. 18,46,950. THE total tax liability and penalty were determined at Rs. 18,27,952, and the total value of the assets seized and retained was Rs. 8,54,526. Regular assessment for the aforesaid assessment year was made by the ITO under Section 143(3) of the Act on October 27, 1977, and now the petitioner's total income was estimated at Rs. 2,20,270, raising a demand of Rs. 1,57,382 by way of tax. After that order some of the assets of the value of Rs. 1,52,400 were released and the remaining assets of the value of Rs. 5,34,744 were retained.
(3.) WE do not find any merit in either of these two submissions. There is no dispute on facts which we have stated above. Under Sub-section (6) of Section 132 of the Act, the assets retained under Sub-section (5) may be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Section 132B. Section 132B provides for the application of retained assets, and Clause (i) of Sub-section (1) which is relevant for the present purpose reads :