The Petitioner claimed that it was the owner of certain quantity of gold which was seized from the job worker to whom the gold was given to convert into jewellery and in whose hands the same was added as undisclosed income as he could not explain the source thereof. The order of assessment in the case of the job worker was pending before the CIT(A). The High Court held that as the ownership over the gold had not been finalized and the appeal in the case of the job worker was pending before the CIT(A), it could not direct the release of the gold in favour of the Petitioner. (AY. 2017-18)
New Lakshmi Jewellers v. PCIT (2021) 431 ITR 570/318 CTR 713 / 278 Taxman 403/200 DTR 264(Bom) (HC)
S. 132B : Application of seized or requisitioned assets – High court could not direct release of gold in favour of the alleged owner when appeal before the CIT(A) was pending.[S.250, Art .226 ]