The Gujarat High Court in the case Praveenbhai Girdharilal Agarwal Versus Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) observed and has directed the department in order to release the 100.350 grams of seized gold as the assessee in the case had no such outstanding demand.
The bench comprising of Justice Vipul M. Pancholi and Justice Devan M. Desai in the case observed and has stated that the gold in questions belongs to the petitioner, and he is being accounted for it in his books of accounts. Thus, the respondent or department ought not to have withheld the gold which being in question.
The court observed and has stated that the search or the seizure which is being carried out in respect of Sureshkumar from Jay Mata Di Air Service and Jagdish Prasad from Bright Courier. Therefore, the parcel contains the gold, weighing a total of 720.34 grams, was intercepted, and was seized by the said department.
Adding to it, the respondent stated before the court that the value of the seized gold of the petitioner, weighing 720.34 grams, to the total income of the petitioner, treating it as an unaccounted investment in order to protect the interest of the revenue.
Further, the appellant authority allowed the plea moved by petitioner and has deleted the addition made by the respondent in respect of the seized gold of the petitioner.
The petitioner in the plea contended that there being no such demand outstanding against the petitioner for any of the liabilities after effect is given to the order of the Appellate Authority. Thus, the respondent in the case ought to have released the remaining seized gold, wherein it weighted 100.350 grams, which being in favor of the petitioner.
It has also been contended by the department in the case that the addition has been made by the concerned Assessing Officer in the hands of the sender party with regards to the gold seized, weighing 100.350 grams. Subsequently, the demand for an amount of Rs. 3,09,992 has also been raised against the assessee and that the request of the petitioner to release the remaining seized gold has rightly not been entertained, and the Respondents have committed no illegality.
Accordingly, the court in the case observed and has held that merely because some demand is pending and it being not open to the respondent authorities to continue to withhold the gold, weighing 100.350 grams, which being in the ownership of the petitioner.
The counsel, Advocate Fenil H Mehta appeared for the petitioner.
The counsel, Advocate Varun K.Patel represented the respondent.