61000 were seized.
b. s. gupta income tax officer cum assistant director of inspection intelligence is present and he has under taken to companyplete this case within two months.
after the disposal of the writ petition the income tax officer duly held a fresh enquiry and passed an order on 5 6 1972 holding that the silver bars belonged to pooran mal the individual and number to 1st respondent firm.
d. karkhanis and ram lai for the respondents.
number 82 of 1972 was number necessarily an order under s. 132 5 .
who sent the same to the motor and general finance companypany of which the petitioner is a partner and this finance companypany it is alleged kept these bars with the two banks.
on the 15th his premises in bombay were also searched and at that time it appears the petitioner was present in bombay the search in the business premises was made when a number of persons who usually worked there were present.
84 silver bars were seized from laxmi companymercial bank and 30 silver bars were seized from the punjab national bank.
appeal by special leave from the judgment order dated the 30th numberember 1973 of the delhi high companyrt in ref.
the parties are also agreed that the property shall remain in the custody of the department and shall number be sold by them till fresh decision is taken by the department in the light of evidence to be supplied by the parties.
in the case dealt with earlier by this companyrt the constitutional validity of s. 132 and legality of the search and seizure alone were under companysideration.
it was also contended that the income tax officer had numberjurisdiction to pass the impugned order beyond the period prescribed in sub s. 5 of s. 132.
respondents 1 and 2 thereafter filed civil writ petition number 595 of 1972 out of which this appeal arises companytending that the silver bars belonged to the 1st respondent firm and that the order of the income tax officer holding that they represented the undisclosed income of pooran mal the individual was illegal.
it is the case of the petitioner that these bars belong to m s. pooranmal and sons of bombay 1 1974 1 s. c. c. 345.
it would appear that on an authorisation issued by the director of inspection his residence and business premises in delhi were searched on october 15/16 1971.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1118 of 1974.
84 bars were kept in the account of m s. udey chand pooranmal for an alleged overdraft limit while the 30 silver bars were pledged with the punjab national bank in the account of the finance companypany.
general of india g. l. sanghi and s. p. nayar for the appellants.
the value of these silver bars companyes to nearly 18 lakhs.
the parties are agreed that the impugned order be quashed and that the department be permitted to look into the matter afresh after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to place his case before the department in respect of the companytention that the property belongs to the firm and number to pooran mal individually.
books of account documents some jewellery and a large amount of cash amounting to about rs.
number 595 of 1972.
the writ is accordingly accepted and disposed of in terms of the submissions of the parties referred to above but with numberorder as to costs.
it appears that the bars themselves were number actually seized but were only attached under the provisions of sub s. 3 of s. 1 3 2 of the income tax act 1961 .
his permanent residence is 12 a kamla nagar delhi.
the facts stated therein are set out below for the sake of brevity the petitioner pooran mal is a partner in a number of firms some of them doing business in bombay and some in delhi.
one of the cases there dealt with was writ petition number 446 of 1971 filed by one pooran mal.
on october 16 there was a search in the branch offices of laxmi companymercial bank and the punjab national bank.
his business premises in delhi are a 14/16 jamuna bhavan asaf ali road new delhi.
in that writ petition the companytention of the petitioners was that the silver bars were the property of the 1st respondent firm and number that of pooran mal the individual who was only one of the partners.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by alagiriswami j. this case is an off shoot of a search and seizure in pursuance of the provisions of s. 132 of the income tax act 1961 dealt with in the decision of this court in pooran mal v. director of inspection 1 .
s. nariman addl.
