NARESH KUMAR KOHLI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the jewellery which had been seized during the search of the two lockers of the petitioner on 17th Sept., 1996 and 24th Sept., 1996.

(2.) THE residential and business premises of the petitioner were raided on 11th Sept., 1996. His locker No. 39 with Canara Bank, Dalhousie Road, Pathankot, was searched on 17th Sept., 1996 and a Panchnama was prepared, a copy of which has been annexed as Annex. P-1. THE entire jewellery of the value of Rs. 8,29,986 contained in the said locker was seized. Another locker of the petitioner i.e., locker No. 72 with the State Bank of Patiala, Chakki Bank, Pathankot, was also searched on 24th Sept., 1996 and a Panchnama was prepared, a copy of which has been annexed as Annex. P-4. THE entire jewellery of the value of Rs. 9,76,010 found in the said locker was also seized.

(3.) PETITIONER filed an appeal before the Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (for short 'the Tribunal'), which was disposed of vide order dt. 18th Nov., 1999 giving substantial relief to the petitioner. Additions made by the AO to the extent of Rs. 2,88,34,909 were deleted. The AO passed the consequential order on 17th Dec., 1999, giving effect to the relief granted by the Tribunal. The undisclosed income assessed stood revised to Rs. 12,66,170, tax on which worked out to Rs. 7,59,702. After allowing adjustment of Rs. 36,039 on account of tax already deposited, the petitioner was required to pay the balance demand of Rs. 7,23,663. This amount was paid by the petitioner as under : Rs. 3,85,000 on 31st Jan., 2000 Rs. 3,38,663 on 29th Feb., 2000 Since, there was delay in deposit of tax on the part of the petitioner, he was also required to deposit interest under s. 220(2) of the Act which was determined at Rs. 45,582. The said amount was also deposited on 29th Feb., 2000.