JAWAHAR LAL JAIN HUF AND ANOTHER vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS

PDF · subscribers
CWP/20910/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01100976202223 January 2023Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA2 pages
AI SummaryDisposed Of

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition. The decision was based on the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents, who, on instructions, submitted that the release of the jewellery in question was under process and would be completed by January 27, 2023. In light of this assurance, the Court found no further orders to be necessary. The ratio decidendi is that when the revenue assures the release of seized goods within a stipulated timeframe, and this assurance is accepted by the court, the writ petition is disposed of on that basis. No specific issue regarding the legality of retention or entitlement to release was adjudicated on merits; the disposal was procedural based on the respondent's undertaking.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Jawahar Lal Jain HUF and another, filed a writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus. They requested the release of jewellery seized during a search conducted on October 27, 2006, at the business premises and residence of petitioner No. 2 and 3, and the Nikka Mal Babu Ram Group. The petitioners contended that the jewellery was illegally retained despite the conclusion of litigation and demands for the period covered up to the search, with all taxes, interest, and penalties paid. A status report was filed by the respondents, and the counsel for the respondents, on instructions, stated that the release of the jewellery was in process and would be completed by January 27, 2023.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the jewellery seized on October 27, 2006, given that all tax liabilities, interest, and penalties for the relevant assessment years have been paid and litigation concluded? Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argued that the jewellery was illegally retained by the respondents, and they are entitled to its release as all demands for the period up to the search have been settled and all dues paid. They relied on the principle that seized property should be released once the tax proceedings are concluded and dues cleared. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, stated that the release of the jewellery was under process and assured its release by January 27, 2023. No specific legal arguments or reliance on authorities were recorded for the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.20910 of 2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.01.2023

Jawahar Lal Jain HUF And Another

..…... Petitioners V/s.

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh and Others.

….....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present: Ms. Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate with

Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel with

Sh. Aditya Mehtani, Jr. Standing counsel for Respondents.

***

Ritu Bahri, J (Oral)

The present writ petition has been filed uner Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the jewellery seized during the course of search conducted on 27th October, 2006 in business premises and residence of the petitioner No.2 and 3 and Nikka Mal Babu Ram Group whereby the said jewellery has illegally been retained by the respondents despite the fact that the litigation an demands in respect of the years covered till the period of search has already been concluded and all taxes, interest and penalty have been paid but the seized jewellery has not been released to the petitioners.

Status report dated 20.01.2023 filed by the respondent, is taken on record.

Learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions from Mr. Prateek, ITO, Ward (2) submits that the release of the jewellery in question is under process and the same shall be released by 27.01.2023. SONIA PURI 2023.01.25 14:52

-2-

CWP No.20910 of 2022 (O&M)

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact, no further order is called for.

In view of above, the present petition is disposed of.

(RITU BAHRI)

JUDGE

23rd January, 2023

(MANISHA BATRA) Sonia Puri

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable

: Yes/No

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →