Kamleshbhai Rajnikant Shah. v. DIT (2019) 267 taxman 159/( 2020) 420 ITR 274 / 186 DTR 221/ 313 CTR 418(Guj.)(HC)

S. 132A : Powers-Requisition of books of account–Search and seizure–Cash found from the employees of Courier services-Explanation that the cash was withdrawn from several bank accounts–Failure to produce relevant documents–Issue of warrant of authorisation is held to be valid. [S. 131, 132, Art. 226]

Two employees of Angadiya Courier Services namely Surajbhai Pravinchandra Mehta and Rajendrasinh Viramji Vaghela were travelling from Nagpur to Ahmedabad via Surat in a bus of Srinath Travels. Upon physical search of the Bus two bags containing seven packets of cash aggregating Rs 2. 45, 50,000  were recovered by the Police of Vapi. The police took interrogation and revealed that they were employees of  Angadiya Courier Services. Summons were issued to  Surajbhai Pravinchandra Mehta and Rajendrasinh Viramji Vaghela asking them to attend the office of the DDIT(Inv) Surat along with necessary details the cash recovered from their possession. The statements were taken u/s 131 both of them denied that they were not owners of the cash. Thereafter summon was issued to Kaushikkumar Dhayalal Soni a partner of V.P. Angadiya and Courier Services Ahmedabad.  Partner in his statement stated that the cash belongs to Proprietor of S.K Traders.  Proprietor of S.K Traders   stated that the cash were with drawn from cash book. There was some proceedings before the Magistrate Court u/s 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Magistrate had ordered the Police to hand over the cash to the concerned Assessing Officer.   The AO has issued the warrant of authorisation u/s. 132A(1) of the  Act.  The assessee challenged the issue of warrant of authorisation. Dismissing the petition the Court held that when asked to submit details of bank account and cash withdrawals, assessee declined to submit details and prayed for some more time to produce relevant documents hence issue of authorisation is held to be valid.