On writ for release of seized assets, the Court held that the statutory provision of section 132B of the Act is very clear. There appears to be a mandate and such mandate is mandatory and not directory. The courts should attach considerable importance to the time frame provided under sections 132A and 132B when it comes to a question of retention of books of account or of seized assets. It is not permissible for the court to read the time limit provided in the proviso to clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 132B of the Act as being merely directory.  The Court directed the  respondents to hand over the seized asset (diamonds) to the assessee within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.