Arihant Jewellers Vs PCIT (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
Jewellery in Transit Cannot Be Treated as Undisclosed Income – MP High Court Quashes IT Action Against Custodian & Orders Release of Consignment
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, dealt with the legality of seizure of jewellery consignments by the Static Surveillance Team (SST) during Assembly elections & subsequent requisition proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department u/s 132A & reassessment proceedings u/s 148 against a mere employee of the logistics company.
Background
On 23.10.2023, a vehicle of Sequel Logistics Pvt. Ltd. carrying 37 sealed consignments of jewellery valued at over ₹6 crore was intercepted by the SST, Ratlam, during election surveillance. Despite the consignments being accompanied with tax invoices, dockets & authorisation letters, the consignments were seized & later handed over to the Income Tax Department. One of the consignments belonged to Arihant Jewellers valued at ₹1.06 crore.
Subsequently, the IT Department issued summons to Amit Sharma, an employee of Sequel Logistics & wrongly treated him as “owner” of the goods. Requisition u/s 132A was authorised & notices u/s 148 were issued to him for multiple years. Arihant Jewellers as well as Sequel Logistics repeatedly represented for release of goods but the Department refused.
