Search and seizure is a serious invasion on privacy of citizens, and has to be resorted to when there are pre-existing and pre-recorded good reasons to believe that action is called for. Sole ground for action of search and seizure was that Investigation Wing of Income Tax department was in possession of credible information that assessee was in possession of jewellery which represented his undisclosed income or property, however, no cogent basis for arriving at this conclusion was discernible from satisfaction note. Mandatory reasons to believe were not recorded and search authorisation was not obtained prior to interception and conduct of search.Thus, search action was a completely unauthorized and a high-handed action on part of revenue, as mere possession of jewellery ipso facto would not be sufficient for officer to form a belief that same had not been, or would not be disclosed.Moreover, even clause (c) to section 132(1) could not be invoked since assessee was carrying on business of sale and purchase of jewellery and he was legitimately carrying same as his stock-in-trade. Accordingly  search and seizure and ex post facto warrant of authorization issued by respondent revenue under S.  132 was to be quashed and all actions taken pursuant to such search and seizure were to be declared illegal and revenue was to be directed to forthwith return jewellery seized to assessee. The respondents were ordered to pay costs quantified at Rs. 50,000.