DILIP MEHATA Vs. INCOME TAX DEPT.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition filed u/Art. 226 of the Constitution assails order dtd. 29/9/2023 (Annexure-P/3) passed by respondent No.2 invoking Sec. 132(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, "IT Act") prohibiting petitioners/assessee from removing articles (liquor bottles) in the cupboard at the resident of petitioner No.1, without prior permission of the IT Authorities.

(2.) The challenge is founded on the ground that exercise of power by the Authorities is colourable in nature since the subject matter in question relates to Sec. 133 (1) but not u/S.133(3) of IT Act. It is contended that Sec. 132(3) has been intentionally invoked to gain advantage of sixty days limitation period prescribed u/S.132(8) by exposing petitioners/assessee to frequent access and intrusion into the privacy of their premises where the said cupboard is kept.

(3.) Revenue, in turn, has justified the impugned order by assigning singular reason that since the cupboard contains liquor bottles of different brands valued as per the petitioners at Rs.1,24,493.00, the same could not have been seized u/S. 132(1) without permission of the Excise Authorities and, therefore, Sec. 132(3) was invoked imposing prohibitory order.