BHAWNA BABBAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WARD 72(1), DELHI

W.P.(C)/10732/2025HC DelhiDLHC01048482202524 July 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, to decide the petitioner's application for the release of jewellery and cash within a period of eight weeks. The respondent was also directed to communicate the decision to the petitioner. The court did not adjudicate on the merits of the petitioner's claim for the immediate release of the seized items but rather focused on ensuring a timely decision on her pending application. The operative direction was to decide the application, not to release the items directly. No specific issue was left undecided, as the court's action was procedural.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Bhawna Babbar, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking directions for the immediate release of seized jewellery valued at Rs. 43,96,417/- (gross weight 1246.48 grams, net weight 1165.61 grams) and cash amounting to Rs. 3.5 lakhs. These items were seized during search and seizure proceedings by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward 72(1), Delhi. The petitioner contended that there is no outstanding demand pending against her, making the retention of the seized items unjustified. She also stated that an application for the release of these items, filed on June 9, 2023, remained undecided.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondent (Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax) should be directed to immediately release the seized jewellery items valued at Rs. 43,96,417/- to the petitioner. 2. Whether the respondent should be directed to immediately release the seized cash amounting to Rs. 3.5 lakhs, along with applicable interest, to the petitioner. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that since no demand is pending, the revenue has no justification to retain the seized jewellery and cash. She further highlighted that her application for release, filed on June 9, 2023, has not been decided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue regarding the merits of the petitioner's claim for release. The revenue was represented by a Senior Standing Counsel.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~74 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10732/2025

BHAWNA BABBAR

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Mr. Ruchesh Sinha & Ms. Monalisa Maity, Advs.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WARD 72(1), DELHI

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Siddhartha Sinha, Sr. Standing Counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R %

24.07.2025 CM APPL. 44390/2025 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 10732/2025 3. This petition has been filed with the following prayers: “a) That this Hon’ble High Court be pleased to give directions to the Respondents to immediately release the jewellery items seized pertaining/belonging to the petitioner, in the favour of petitioner of Rs. 43,96,417/- grossly weighing at 1246.48 grams and the net weight being 1165.61 grams, valued by the Respondents/-(as per the valuation report dated 22.04.2015 of the department valuer)as per the details mentioned in Annexure P-1; b) That this Hon’ble High Court be pleased to give directions to the Respondents to immediately release the cash amounting to Rs. 3.5 lacs which was seized during the course of the search and seizure proceedings in the case of the Petitioner along with the applicable interest; This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/08/2025 at 12:58:12

c) Such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case..”

In effect the petitioner is seeking release of jewellery items and cash amount of Rs. 3.5 lakhs, which were seized. 5. Counsel for the petitioner states that as of today there is no demand pending which needs to be satisfied by the petitioner as such there is no reason for the respondents to retain the jewellery and the cash. She also states that the application was made on 09.06.2023 for the release of the jewellery and the cash of Rs. 3.5 lakhs which has not been decided. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as the application has been filed by the petitioner for the release of jewellery and cash, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to decide the application of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks, as an outer limit. The respondent will communicate the decision to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

VINOD KUMAR, J JULY 24, 2025 ‘JK’ This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/08/2025 at 12:58:12

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →