Pawan Kumar Garg Vs Union of India And 4 Ors (Gauhati High Court)
In the present case, the respondent has not placed any materials whatsoever to indicate that Assessing Authority had any materials on the basis of which he has reasons to suspect that the petitioner has concealed or is likely to conceal any income. The affidavit filed on behalf of the authority is absolutely silent in this regard. The very fact that the respondent issued notices under Section 131 (1A) of the Act after the search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was conducted, goes to show that there was neither any reasons to suspect nor materials before the Authorizing Officer on the basis of which search operation could have been conducted under Section 132 of the Act. Thus, the two essential conditions being absent before the impugned search under Section 132 was conducted, the same is without jurisdiction. Search and seizure cannot be a fishing expedition. Before the search is authorized, the authority must have reasons to believe that the assessee has not or would not have disclosed his income. As such, the reasons to believe must exist before the authority to take action and not after the search is conducted. Since, in the present case, nothing has been shown, it is assumed that there was no material whatsoever before the Assessing Officer prior to authorizing the search.
