Supreme Court Of India
CIT vs. Dr. Nandlal Tahiliani
Section 132
R.S. Pathak, C.J. & M.H. Kania, J.
Special Leave Petn. (Civil) No. 985 of 1988
10th March, 1988
Counsel Appeared
Kuldeep Singh with Miss A. Subhashini & M.B. Rao, for the Petitioner : Raja Ram Agarwal & S.N. Kacker with Vijay Hansaria & Sunil K. Jain, for the Respondent
BY THE COURT:
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length, but we are of the opinion that inasmuch as the articles and money seized have now been released and are no longer in the possession of the petitioner, no useful purpose will be served by entertaining this Special Leave Petition. In the circumstances and without expressing any opinion in regard to the findings of the High Court, this petition is dismissed. We may observe, however, that it is open to the IT authorities to take such other proceedings against the respondent as are available under the IT Act. For that purpose, if it is otherwise permissible in law, it will be open to the IT authorities to take into account any information derived from the inventories prepared in consequence of the search and seizure made under s. 132 of the IT Act and impugned in the present case.
[Citation : 172 ITR 627]
