RAMESH CHANDRA V. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCO

CWJC/273/2011

AI Insights

The case involves Ramesh Chandra, the petitioner, who filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against the Income Tax Department for not returning articles seized during a search operation on November 26, 1992. Despite various legal proceedings, including a re-assessment and appeals, the articles were not returned to the petitioner. The Department admitted to retaining the articles without legal authority and acknowledged the return of only 94 out of 99 seized articles. The court found the Department's failure to return the articles constituted undue harassment to the petitioner and directed compensation for the lost items.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 745914 (HC-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: HARSHWARDHAN PRASAD; ARCHANA SINHA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAKASH SAHAY
• Keywords: Income Tax Department; Seizure of articles; Compensation for lost articles; Undue harassment
• Section: 226

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.273 of 2011 ====================================================== Ramesh Chandra S/o Late Chandrakant Prasad R/o Chandra Bhawan, Mithapur, B-Area, P.S.-Jakkanpur, Distt.-Patna .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Revenue Building, Baily Road, Patna 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Revenue Building Baily Road, Patna 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Dakbunglow Road, Patna .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Prakash Sahay, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Harshwardhan Prasad, Sr. S.C. Mrs. Archana Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 16. 7-1-2013 This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by the assessee for recovery of the articles seized by the respondent-Income tax Department as far back as on 26th November 1992. Consequent upon search and seizer made in the year 1992, under the order of re-assessment dated 29th March 1996 a demand was made for additional tax of Rs.2,84,760/- for the assessment year 1993-94. The said order was set aside by the Patna High Court CWJC No.273 of 2011 (16) dt.07-01-2013 2 / 3 2 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Patna in Appeal No.354/A-1/97-98 on 25th February 1999. The said order was unsuccessfully challenged by the Department before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal preferred by the Department on 6th December 2000. Although, the petitioner has succeeded as far back as on 25th February 1999, till date the articles seized by the Department are not released/returned. Learned counsel Mr. Prasad appearing for the Department admits that the appeal preferred against the order of the Tribunal has been dismissed in 2007. He also agrees that it is the duty of the Department to return/release the articles seized. One Sushil Kumar, Income Tax Officer, Ward-I, Patna has filed counter affidavit to admit that the Department has failed to perform its duty in returning the seized articles. He has further submitted that out of the 99 articles seized, the Department has now returned 94 articles. Five articles are yet to be returned. In spite of the time granted by this Court time and again, today we are informed by the learned counsel Mr. Prasad that in spite of the efforts made by the officers, the remaining five articles could not be traced or located. He has expressed inability of the Department to return the said five articles, which according to Mr. Prasad are the books of accounts and certain diaries/exercise books. Be that as it may, the Department is not the master of the assessee’s property. They are under statutory as well as moral obligation to return the seized articles after the proceedings Patna High Court CWJC No.273 of 2011 (16) dt.07-01-2013 3 / 3 3 are over. In the present case, as recorded in the earlier orders, the seized articles were retained by the Department without the authority of law. Some of them were returned after 11 years. We are of the opinion, that the Department has, by its inaction in returning the seized articles, caused undue harassment to the assessee. We believe, the assessee needs to be compensated for such undue harassment and the lost articles. We hereby direct the respondent No.1, the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-I, to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand) to the writ petitioner for the lost articles. Such compensation will be paid to the writ petitioner latest by 31st January 2013. In the event the respondent no.1 fails to pay the compensation as directed, the amount of compensation will carry interest @ 8% per annum commencing from 1st February 2013 till the date of payment. Registry will send copy of this order to the respondent no.1, the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Patna forthwith. The Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) "