High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Rekha Chandra vs The Chief Commissioner Of Inco on 22 April, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Rekha Chandra vs The Chief Commissioner Of Inco on 22 April, 2011
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                           CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.270 of 2011

                  ======================================================
                  Rekha Chandra, W/o Dr. Ramesh Chandra R/o Chandra Bhawan, Mithapur
                  B Area, P.S.-Jakkanapur, District-Patna.
                                                                   ............Petitioner
                                                    Versus
                  1. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Revenue Building, Bailey
                     Road, Patna.
                  2. The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Revenue Building Bailey Road,
                     Patna.
                  3. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Lok Nayak
                     Bhawan, Dakbunglow Road, Patna.
                                                                   ........ Respondents.
                  ======================================================
                  APPEARANCE :

                  For the Petitioner  : Mr. Prakash Sahay, Advocate.
                  For the Respondents : Mr. Harshwardhan Prasad, Advocate.
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                      And
                            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
                  ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

5. 22.04.2011 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
has been filed by one Rekha Chandra for recovery of
jewellery seized by the Income Tax Department on 26th
November 1992.

Pursuant to the said search and seizure; admittedly
neither the petitioner nor her husband has been held liable for
recovery nor any demand has been raised against the
petitioner or her husband. Nevertheless, the Department failed
to return the jewellery seized. Therefore, the present writ
petition.

Learned Advocate Mr. Prakash Sahay appears for
the petitioner. He admits that pending this petition, Income
Tax Department has returned the jewellery seized on 26th
2

November 1992. He agrees that the cause of action does not
survive. He, therefore, seeks leave to withdraw this petition.

Leave is granted. Petition is disposed of as
withdrawn.


                                          ( R.M.Doshit,CJ. )


Sujit                                       (Jyoti Saran,J)