| Case ID |
370d780e-670c-40d4-9cff-b73104d5362c |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
D-2741 of 2001 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 01, 2003 |
| Hearing Date |
Nov 23, 2003 |
| Decision |
The Allahabad High Court held that the search and seizure operations conducted on November 23, 2001, were illegal. The court found that the reasons recorded under section 132 were based on mere rumors and lacked sufficient material to justify the search. The petitioner, a reputable dental surgeon, had consistently filed his income tax returns and had provided explanations for the cash and jewelry seized. The court emphasized that the Income-tax Department must base its actions on reasonable and sufficient information, not on generalities or hearsay. Thus, the court ordered the immediate return of all seized cash and jewelry to the petitioner. |
| Summary |
In the case of Dr. Sushil Rastogi v. Director of Investigation, IT Deptt., the Allahabad High Court addressed the legality of search and seizure operations conducted by the Income-tax Department. The petitioner, a prominent dental surgeon, challenged the seizure of cash and jewelry from his premises, arguing that the operation was based on unfounded rumors. The court examined the provisions of section 132 of the Income-tax Act, which allows for search and seizure under specific conditions. It ruled that the department failed to demonstrate reasonable grounds for the action taken, as the claims were not substantiated by credible evidence. The court's decision highlighted the importance of protecting taxpayers' rights against arbitrary actions by tax authorities, reaffirming that mere suspicions or general complaints do not justify invasive measures. This case serves as a significant precedent regarding the standards required for lawful search and seizure in tax matters, emphasizing the need for integrity and accountability in tax administration. |
| Court |
Allahabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
M. Katju,
Prakash Krishna
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
Dr. Sushil Rastogi
|
| Respondents |
Director of Investigation, IT Deptt
|
| Citations |
2003 SLD 3557,
(2003) 260 ITR 249
|
| Other Citations |
CIT v. Vindhya Metal Corpn. [1997] 224 ITR 614,
Dr. Nand Lal Tahiliani v. CIT [1988] 170 ITR 592,
L.R. Gupta v. Union of India [1992] 194 ITR 32,
Ajit Jain v. Union of India [2000] 242 ITR 302
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
132
|