DEVENDRA KUMAR JAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that on 28-5-2001 an amount rs,3,25,000/- was seized from the petitioner by the police authorities, for which he could not give satisfactory explanation to the police authorities. The police authorities intimated about the said seizure to the Income tax department. Subsequently the petitioner has paid income tax as assessed by the Assessing Authority vide order dated 30-6-2003. However, despite payment of income-tax, the said amount Rs. 3,25,000/- has not been refunded to the petitioner by the income-Tax department. It is, further the case of the petitioner that repeatedly he has submitted applications and reminders to the department. But the same had fallen on deaf ears. But, on 17-1-2006, during pendency of this writ petition, the said amount was refunded to the petitioner by the department. However, no interest has been paid to the petitioner for withholding the seized amount. Hence, the petitioner has made a limited prayer that the department be directed to pay interest for withholding the seized amount from 30-6-2003 to 17-1-2006. department. But the same had fallen on deaf ears. But, on 17-1-2006, during pendency of this writ petition, the said amount was refunded to the petitioner by the department. However, no interest has been paid to the petitioner for withholding the seized amount. Hence, the petitioner has made a limited prayer that the department be directed to pay interest for withholding the seized amount from 30-6-2003 to 17-1-2006.

(2.) THE contention of Mr. Pradeep Kasliwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that under Section 244-A of the Income Tax act,1961 the department is duty bound to pay interest on the seized amount. However, according to Mr. Anuroop Singhi and Mrs. Parinitoo jain, learned counsel for the department, the department needs to calculate the amount of interest.

(3.) IN these facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to submit an application for grant of interest before the concerning authority, who may examine and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within two months thereafter.