Abha Jain Vs ADIT (Inv.)-1 (Rajasthan High Court)
In the case of Abha Jain Vs ADIT, the Rajasthan High Court addressed a procedural dispute stemming from a minor clerical error. The petitioner had filed an application for the release of seized items, but it was misaddressed. The application was sent to “Assessing Officer, DCIT, Circle-4,” omitting the word “Central,” which was part of the correct designation, “Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Circle-4.”
The court dismissed the tax department’s objection to the misaddressing, stating that a “diligent officer” should have forwarded the application to the correct department. Rather than allowing the procedural issue to delay the matter, the court took a pragmatic approach. It ordered the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Circle-4, to treat the petition itself as the application for the release of the seized items.
To ensure prompt action, the court set a strict timeline, mandating that the application be disposed of within four weeks from the date the order is uploaded. It also specified that non-receipt of a copy of the order would not be an excuse for delay. Additionally, the court required that a personal hearing be given to the petitioner before a final decision is made, with five working days’ advance notice. The court clarified that its order was solely on procedural grounds and did not address the merits of the case regarding the release of the seized items. The petition was disposed of with these directives, compelling the tax authorities to act on the petitioner’s request.
