Prem Chand vs Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Another

V.K. Khanna, J.—The petitioner, in this writ petition, has raised a grievance that although the pawned articles which had been seized had been ordered to be released, the amount, of bank guarantee which has been asked for is excessive in the sense that it includes the precise value of the pawned articles and the amount of interest also. It has also been alleged that an application has been moved before the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Assessment), Range-II, Muzaffarnagar, for reconsideration of the matter on March 17, 1988, which has not been disposed of as yet by the aforesaid authority.

At the admission stage, we have heard Sri Bharatji Agarwal, senior standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Department, and the present writ petition is being finally disposed of in accordance with the rules of the court.

After hearing learned counsel for the purlins, we are of the opinion in view of the statement made by Sri Bharatji Agarwal, senior standing counsel, that the application moved by the petitioner before the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner will be disposed of within a period of three weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order by the petitioner. The certified copy will be presented by the petitioner personally to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner along with a copy of the writ petition.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to any further direction from this court. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

A certified copy of this order shall be given to learned counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges within forty-eight hours.