The High Court · 2025

Petition iinder Article 226 of the Constitution of tndia praying that in the circumstances :btated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to is,*e a Writ of tMandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction de6laring the inaction of Respondents in not following the due process of law and not releasing the seized cash on 21-09-2024 and not considering the application filed by the Petitioner u/s 1328 of the lncome Tax Act dated 0B-10- 2025 is totally illegal, arbitrary and is in complete violation of Petitioner's rights conferred under Article 14, 19gi,265 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent No.1 to 3 to release the cash seized amounting to Rs. 65,00,0001 along with interest in the interests of justice and to pass in the interest of justice and to pass in the interest of justice. \. IA NO : 1 0F 2025 Petition uncler Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed irr support of the petition, the High Court rnay be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the application tiled by the Pe::itioner under section 1328 of the lncorre tax Act filed for the release of seized assets on 21-09-2A24 and issue a nil panchanama against the search conducted ,:n 23-09-2024 in the residential premises as well as the business premises of the Petitioner, pending disposal of the Main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: MS. HIMANGINI SANGHI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI SRINARAYAN TOSHNIVVAL APPEARS FOR SRI N. PRAVEEN REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER . ('" I ) THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APAITESH KT]MAR SINGH AND THE HON'I}LE SRI JUSTICE G.I\I.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No. 34538 of 2025 ORDER: Ms. Himangini Sanghi, learned counsel appears fbr petitioner. Sri Srinarayan Toshniwal, learned counsel appears for Sri N. Praveen Reddy, learned counsel for fncome-tax, for respondents.

2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefi "F'or the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction declaring the inaction of Respondents in not following the due process of law and not releasing the scized cash on 21.09.2024 and not considering tlte application filed by the Petitioner u/s l32B of the Income Tax Act dated 08.10.2025 is totally illegal, arbitrary and is in complete violation of my rights conferred undcr Article 14. 19g,265 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No.l to 3 to release the cash seized amounting to Rs.65,00,000/- along with interest in the interests ofjustice."

3. Under the first proviso to Section 1328(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), an application is 2 {CJ (AKrS, J) & cMlvl, J W.P.No.34538 of 2025 to be made by the person concerned to the Assessing Officer within thifty (30) days from the end of the month in which the asset was seized, lor release of the asset and tlle nature and source of ;rcquisition of any such asset is to be explained to the satisfuctiorl of the Assessing Officer, who upon consideration may relea:;e any portion of the asset with the prior approval of the Principal Chie{'Cornmissioner or Chief Conrmissioner or Principal t-lontrnissioner or Commissioner to the person frorn whose custod'1' the asscts were seized after ascertaining of any, existing li;rbility refr:rred to in the said clause to be recovered out of such asset. The second proviso provides that such asset or any portion thereof referred to in the first ltrc,viso shall be released rvithin 120 days from the date on which the last of the authorizations for search under Section 132 or flrr requisition under Section I32A, as the case may be, was executed.

4. [n tire present case, the search was c,cnducted on

21.09.2024-but the petitioner made an application for release of the seiz,:d cash, on 08.10.2025, much after thirty (30) days of the said seizure. J'he petitioner has approached this Court 3 HCJ (AKrS, J) & CMM, J W.P.No.34538 of 2025 alleging that the respondents have not released the cash seized on 2l .09.2024 in teeth of Section 132B of the Act

5. During the course of hearing, learned counsel lor the petitioner has submitted that panchanama in relation to the search conducted on 23 .09.2024 in the residential and business premises of the petitioner has also not been furnished to the petitioner.

6. However, the petitioner has not impleaded the Director of Incorne Tax (Investigation) in the array of respondents.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in order to seek release of the seized cash, the petitioner ought to have made an application within thirty (30) days of such seizure which he has not made. Therefbre, the alleged infraction of the provisions of Section 132B^ of the Act is not made out by the petitioner. However, since the Director of Income Tax (Investigation) concerned has not been impleaded, he is not in a position to say whether any direction to release the seized cash has been issued or not. \ I I , t 4 }iCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J .P.No.34538 of 2025

8. In the facts and circulnstances noted above , this Court is of the vir:rv that so far as release of assets pursuant to the setzure lt; collccrned, the petitioner has nct made any applicatioir as stated under the first proviso to Scotion l32B of the Act. -ilrcref'ore, the allegation that the respondents had not released the seized cash within 120 days is misplaced. Hou,evcr, s<-r far as lunrishing the panchanama to the petitioner is concernetl, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Officer cCrflcer'red seeking to furnish the same. Since the Officer concerned has not been made a pary, this Court is restrained in issuing specific direction in that regar:d. The instant Writ Petition is accordingly disnrissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY/ S}D/.B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to tVls. Himangini Sanghi, Advocate tOpUCl 2' one cc to Sri N. praveen Reddy(senior sc rncome Tax) topucl 3. Two CD Copi,:s TJ LS HIGH COURT DATED:1411112025 ' ':-: "::"\\ '/j'iil:: " -." iit :i-i "', 14',.\, L.. ,\* ORDER WP.No.34538 of 2025 $ $ $tr ?t?5 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS