Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bhubaneshwar And Anr v. Parmeshwari Devi Sultania And Ors

Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) _4 . .... COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. A v. PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. MARCH 6, 1998 B [MRS. SUJATA V. MANOHAR AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.] Income Tax Act, 1961: Sections 293,132 (B), 132 (4),(5),(7) and (11)-Bar of civil suit to set aside or modify assessment order- Search and seizure -Certain assets including gold ornaments seized and retained by c Income Tax Department--Partition suit by a sister of assessee claiming her share in the seized gold ornaments-Maintainability of-Held, not maintainable as the claim in the suit would effect the order passed under section 132(5) of the Income Tax Act-Claimant could have instead resorted to the remedy provided under the Act by filing objection under section 132(11)-Civil Procedure Code, 1908-Section 9. D D Words and Phrases : 'Any person '-Meaning and scope of-Income Tax Act, 1961 : Section 132(11). Income-Tax Officer conducted search and seizure under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at a residential and business premises of 'B'. Various assets including gold ornaments were seized in the raid. On interrogation 'B' gave a statement that the gold ornaments belonged to deceased 'M' first wife of his father, who had bequeathed them for her only daughter, Respondent No. 1 and other children of his father from his second F wife. The said gold ornaments were in the custody of his father and on his death it came into his custody. The Income Tax Officer disbelieving the version of 'B' passed an order under section 132(5) of the Act and directed that all the assets seized including gold ornaments be retained by the department. Respondent No. 1 filed a petition before the Income Tax Officer G for return of the ornaments, which was rejected. Therefore, she filed a partition suit claiming 5/14th of her share in the gold ornaments which were seized. Revenue objected to the maintainability of the suit being clearly barred by section 293 of the Act. However, the Subordinate Court rejected the objection of the ReYenue holding that section 293 of the Act could not be a blanket bar for all types of civil suits and as there was no remedy in H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998) 2 S.C.R. A the Act for redressal of the grievance of respondent No. 1, the relief claimed in the suit could be granted to her in the Act. On revision, High Court upheld the order of the Subordinate Court on the ground that section 132 (5) of Income Tax Act did not give finality to order passed under the Act. Aggrieved, Revenue has filed the present appeal. B Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD: 1.1. Both the High Court and Subordinate Court were not .iustified in holding that the suit was not barred under section 293 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (270-G) 1.2 The High Court failed to consider the effect of the decree if C passed in the suit on the order under Section 132(5) of the Act or other proceedings under Section 132B of the Act. When Section 293 originally stood, it pnwided that "no suit shall be brought in any civil court to set aside or modify any assessment or order made under this Act". The word "assessment" was omitted and the words "proceeding taken" were inserted D in its place. The scope of Section 293 of the Act has been widened now even to include any proceeding under the Act and it is not confined merely to set aside or modify any order. Section 293 is specific and docs not admit filing of suit which has the effect of even indirectly setting aside modifying of any proceeding taken under the Act or order made thereunder. (264-D, 270-C) Raleigh Investment Co. Ltd. v. Governor-General in Council, (1947) 15 E IR 332 (PC); Kamala Mills Ltd. v. State of Bombay, (1965) 56 TR 643 and Dulhabhai etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh &Am:, (1968) 3 SCR 662 =AIR (1969) SC 78, relied on. Ranganmal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (1963) 48 ITR 598 Mad. approved. F State of Bombay (Now Gujarat) v. Jagmohanda & Am:, (1966) 60 ITR 206, distinguished. 1.3. The direct effect of the decree in the suit would be that the gold Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) ਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਭੁਵਨੇਸ਼ਵਰਅਤੇਹੋਰ ਬਨਾਮਪਰਮੇਸ਼ਵਰੀਦੇਵੀਸੁਲਤਾਨੀਆਅਤੇਹੋਰ6 ਮਾਰਚ, 1998 [ਸ਼੍ਰੀਮਤੀਸੁਜਾਤਾਵੀ. ਮਨੋਹਰਅਤੇਡੀ.ਪੀ. ਵਾਧਵਾ, ਜੇਜੇ.] ਇਨਕਮਟੈਕਸਐਕਟ, 1961: ਧਾਰਾ293,132 (ਬੀ), 132 (4), (5), (7) ਅਤੇ(11)-ਮੁਲਾਂਕਣਆਦੇਸ਼ਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਨਜਾਂਸੋਧਣਲਈਸਿਵਲਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦੀਪਾਬੰਦੀਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤ- ਆਮਦਨਕਰਵਿਭਾਗਦੁਆਰਾਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੇਅਤੇਰੱਖੇਗਏਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਸਮੇਤਕੁਝਸੰਪਤੀਆਂ- ਟੈਕਸਦਾਤਾਦੀਭੈਣਦੁਆਰਾਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੇਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਵਿੱਚਆਪਣੇਹਿੱਸੇਦਾਦਾਅਵਾਕਰਨਵਾਲਾਵੰਡਮੁਕੱਦਮਾ- ਰੱਖੇਜਾਣਦੀਯੋਗਤਾ, ਬਣਾਈਰੱਖਣਯੋਗਨਹੀਂਕਿਉਂਕਿਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਵਿੱਚਦਾਅਵਾਆਮਦਨਕਰਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਪਾਸਕੀਤੇਗਏਆਦੇਸ਼ਨੂੰਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਤਕਰੇਗਾ- ਦਾਅਵੇਦਾਰਇਸਦੀਬਜਾਏਧਾਰਾ132(11) ਸਿਵਲਪ੍ਰੋਸੀਜਰਕੋਡ, 1908-ਧਾਰਾ9 ਦੇਤਹਿਤਇਤਰਾਜ਼ਦਾਇਰਕਰਕੇਐਕਟਦੇਤਹਿਤਪ੍ਰਦਾਨਕੀਤੇਗਏਉਪਾਅਦਾਸਹਾਰਾਲੈਸਕਦਾਸੀ। ਸ਼ਬਦਅਤੇਵਾਕੰਸ਼: 'ਕੋਈਵੀਵਿਅਕਤੀ' ਆਮਦਨਕਰਐਕਟ, 1961 ਦਾਅਰਥਅਤੇਦਾਇਰਾ: ਧਾਰਾ132(11)। ਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਨੇਆਮਦਨਕਰਐਕਟ, 1961 ਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੇਤਹਿਤ'ਬੀ' ਦੇਇੱਕਰਿਹਾਇਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਵਪਾਰਕਅਹਾਤੇ'ਤੇਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀਕੀਤੀ।ਛਾਪੇਮਾਰੀਵਿੱਚਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਸਮੇਤਕਈਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂ।ਪੁੱਛਗਿੱਛ'ਬੀ' ਨੇਬਿਆਨਦਿੱਤਾਕਿਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਮ੍ਰਿਤਕ'ਐਮ' ਦੇਆਪਣੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਪਹਿਲੀਪਤਨੀਦੇਸਨ, ਜਿਸਨੇਉਨ੍ਹਾਂਨੂੰਆਪਣੀਇਕਲੌਤੀਧੀ, ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਨੰਬਰ1 ਅਤੇਆਪਣੀਦੂਜੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਆਪਣੇਪਿਤਾਦੇਹੋਰਬੱਚਿਆਂਲਈਵਸੀਅਤਵਿੱਚਦਿੱਤਾਸੀ।ਉਕਤਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਹਿਰਾਸਤਵਿੱਚਸਨਅਤੇਉਸਦੀਮੌਤ'ਤੇਇਹਉਸਦੀਹਿਰਾਸਤਵਿੱਚਆਗਏ।ਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਨੇ'ਬੀ' ਦੇਸੰਸਕਰਣਨੂੰਨਕਾਰਦੇਹੋਏਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਇੱਕਆਦੇਸ਼ਪਾਸਕੀਤਾਅਤੇਨਿਰਦੇਸ਼ਦਿੱਤਾਕਿਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਸਮੇਤਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂਸਾਰੀਆਂਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂਵਿਭਾਗਦੁਆਰਾਰੱਖੀਆਂਜਾਣ।ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਨੰਬਰ1 ਨੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਵਾਪਸੀਲਈਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੇਸਾਹਮਣੇਇੱਕਪਟੀਸ਼ਨਦਾਇਰਕੀਤੀ, ਜਿਸਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਦਿੱਤਾਗਿਆ।ਇਸਲਈ, ਉਸਨੇਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੇਗਏਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਵਿੱਚਆਪਣੇਹਿੱਸੇਦੇ5/14ਵੇਂਹਿੱਸੇਦਾਦਾਅਵਾਕਰਦੇਹੋਏਵੰਡਦਾਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਦਾਇਰਕੀਤਾ।ਮਾਲੀਏਨੇਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ293 ਦੁਆਰਾਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦੀਸਾਂਭ-ਸੰਭਾਲਨੂੰਸਪੱਸ਼ਟਤੌਰ'ਤੇਰੋਕਲਗਾਉਣ'ਤੇਇਤਰਾਜ਼ਕੀਤਾ।ਹਾਲਾਂਕਿ, ਅਧੀਨਅਦਾਲਤਨੇਮਾਲਵਿਭਾਗਦੇਇਸਇਤਰਾਜ਼ਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਦਿੱਤਾਕਿਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ293 ਸਾਰੇਪ੍ਰਕਾਰਦੇਸਿਵਲਮੁਕੱਦਮਿਆਂਲਈਇੱਕਆਮਰੁਕਾਵਟਨਹੀਂਹੋਸਕਦੀਅਤੇਕਿਉਂਕਿਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਨੰਬਰ1 ਦੀਸ਼ਿਕਾਇਤਦੇਨਿਪਟਾਰੇਲਈਐਕਟਵਿੱਚਕੋਈਉਪਾਅਨਹੀਂਸੀ, ਇਸਲਈਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਵਿੱਚਦਾਅਵਾਕੀਤੀਗਈਰਾਹਤਉਸਨੂੰਐਕਟ''ਵਿੱਚਦਿੱਤੀਜਾਸਕਦੀਹੈ।ਸੋਧਤੇ, ਹਾਈਕੋਰਟਨੇਅਧੀਨਅਦਾਲਤਦੇਹੁਕਮਨੂੰਇਸਆਧਾਰਤੇਬਰਕਰਾਰਰੱਖਿਆਕਿਆਮਦਨਕਰਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ ਸੁਪਰੀਮਕੋਰਟਰਿਪੋਰਟਾਂ[1998) 2 ਐਸ.ਸੀ.ਆਰ. 132 (5) ਨੇਐਕਟਦੇਤਹਿਤਪਾਸਕੀਤੇਗਏਹੁਕਮਨੂੰਅੰਤਿਮਰੂਪਨਹੀਂਦਿੱਤਾ।ਦੁਖੀਹੋਕੇ, ਮਾਲਨੇਮੌਜੂਦਾਅਪੀਲਦਾਇਰਕੀਤੀਹੈ। ਅਪੀਲਨੂੰਮਨਜ਼ੂਰੀਦਿੰਦੇਹੋਏ, ਇਸਅਦਾਲਤਨੇਕਿਹਾ 1.1. ਹਾਈਕੋਰਟਅਤੇਅਧੀਨਅਦਾਲਤਦੋਵੇਂਇਹਕਹਿਣਵਿੱਚਜਾਇਜ਼ਨਹੀਂਸਨਕਿਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਨੂੰਆਮਦਨਕਰਐਕਟ,1961 ਦੀਧਾਰਾ293 ਦੇਤਹਿਤਰੋਕਿਆਨਹੀਂਗਿਆਸੀ।[270-ਜੀ] 1.2 ਹਾਈਕੋਰਟਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਦਿੱਤੇਗਏਹੁਕਮਜਾਂਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132ਬੀਦੇਤਹਿਤਹੋਰਕਾਰਵਾਈਆਂ'ਤੇਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਵਿੱਚਪਾਸਕੀਤੇਗਏਫ਼ਰਮਾਨਦੇਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ'ਤੇਵਿਚਾਰਕਰਨਵਿੱਚਅਸਫਲਰਹੀ।ਜਦੋਂਧਾਰਾ293 ਅਸਲਵਿੱਚਖੜ੍ਹੀਸੀ, ਤਾਂਇਸਵਿੱਚਇਹਵਿਵਸਥਾਸੀਕਿ"ਇਸਐਕਟਅਧੀਨਕੀਤੇਗਏਕਿਸੇਵੀਮੁਲਾਂਕਣਜਾਂਆਦੇਸ਼ਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਨਜਾਂਸੋਧਣਲਈਕਿਸੇਵੀਸਿਵਲਅਦਾਲਤਵਿੱਚਕੋਈਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਨਹੀਂਲਿਆਂਦਾਜਾਵੇਗਾ"।"ਮੁਲਾਂਕਣ" ਸ਼ਬਦਨੂੰਛੱਡਦਿੱਤਾਗਿਆਸੀਅਤੇਇਸਦੀਥਾਂ'ਤੇ"ਕਾਰਵਾਈਕੀਤੀਜਾਰਹੀਹੈ" ਸ਼ਬਦਸ਼ਾਮਲਕੀਤੇਗਏਸਨ।ਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ293 ਦਾਦਾਇਰਾਹੁਣਐਕਟਅਧੀਨਕਿਸੇਵੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਨੂੰਸ਼ਾਮਲਕਰਨਲਈਵੀਵਧਾਦਿੱਤਾਗਿਆਹੈਅਤੇਇਹਸਿਰਫ਼ਕਿਸੇਵੀਆਦੇਸ਼ਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਨਜਾਂਸੋਧਣਤੱਕਸੀਮਤਨਹੀਂਹੈ।ਧਾਰਾ293 ਖਾਸਹੈਅਤੇਅਜਿਹੇਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦਾਇਰਕਰਨਨੂੰਸਵੀਕਾਰਨਹੀਂਕਰਦੀਹੈਜਿਸਦਾਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਐਕਟਅਧੀਨਕੀਤੀਗਈਕਿਸੇਵੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਜਾਂਇਸਦੇਅਧੀਨਕੀਤੇਗਏਆਦੇਸ਼ਨੂੰਅਸਿੱਧੇਤੌਰ'ਤੇਸੋਧਣਨੂੰਵੀਰੱਦਕਰਨਦਾਹੁੰਦਾਹੈ।[264-ਡੀ, 270-ਸੀ] ਰੈਲੀਇਨਵੈਸਟਮੈਂਟਕੰਪਨੀਲਿਮਟਿਡਬਨਾਮਗਵਰਨਰ-ਜਨਰਲਇਨਕੌਂਸਲ, (1947) 15 ਆਈ.ਆਰ332 (ਪੀਸੀ);ਕਮਲਾਮਿੱਲਜ਼ਲਿਮਟਿਡਬਨਾਮਬੰਬੇਰਾਜ, (1965) 56 ਟੀਆਰ643 ਅਤੇਦੁਲਹਾਭਾਈਆਦਿਬਨਾਮਮੱਧਪ੍ਰਦੇਸ਼ਰਾਜਅਤੇਹੋਰ[1968] 3 ਐਸਸੀਆਰ662 = ਏਆਈਆਰ(1969) ਐਸਸੀ78, 'ਤੇਨਿਰਭਰ। ਰੰਗਨਮਲਅਤੇਹੋਰਬਨਾਮਭਾਰਤਸੰਘਅਤੇਹੋਰ(1963) 48 ਆਈਟੀਆਰ598 ਮੈਡ. ਮਨਜ਼ੂਰ। ਬੰਬੇਰਾਜ(ਹੁਣਗੁਜਰਾਤ) ਬਨਾਮਜਗਮੋਹੰਡਾਅਤੇਹੋਰ(1966) 60 ਆਈਟੀਆਰ206, ਵਿਸ਼ੇਸ਼। 1.3. ਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਵਿੱਚਫ਼ਰਮਾਨਦਾਸਿੱਧਾਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਇਹਹੋਵੇਗਾਕਿਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇ, ਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦਾਵਿਸ਼ਾ, ਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੇਹੁਕਮਤੋਂਬਾਹਰਹੋਜਾਣਗੇਅਤੇਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132-ਬੀਦੇਤਹਿਤਕਾਰਵਾਈਆਂਵਿੱਚਲਾਗੂਕਰਨਲਈਉਪਲਬਧਨਹੀਂਹੋਣਗੇ।ਇਹਮਾਇਨੇਨਹੀਂਰੱਖਦਾਜੇਕਰਧਾਰਾ132 ਅਧੀਨਕਾਰਵਾਈਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਜਾਂ132(11) ਅਧੀਨਪਾਸਕੀਤੇਗਏਹੁਕਮਨੂੰਕੋਈਅੰਤਿਮਰੂਪਨਹੀਂਦਿੰਦੀ।ਇਹਮਾਲੀਆਦਾਮਾਮਲਾਨਹੀਂਹੈਕਿਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਥਾਰਟੀਵੰਡਲਈਫ਼ਰਮਾਨਦੇਸਕਦੀਹੈ।ਇਹਕੇਸਦੇਫੈਸਲੇਲਈਵੀਮਹੱਤਵਪੂਰਨਨਹੀਂਹੈਕਿਕੀਮੁੱਦਈਦੁਆਰਾਹੁਣਸਥਾਪਤਕੀਤੀਗਈਵਸੀਅਤਸੱਚੀਸੀਜਾਂਨਹੀਂ।ਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਭੁਵਨੇਸ਼ਵਾਬਨਾਮਪਰਮੇਸ਼ਵਰੀਦੇਵੀਸੁਲਤਾਨੀਆ ਇਹਸਵਾਲਜੋਸਿੱਧੇਤੌਰ'ਤੇਵਿਚਾਰਨਲਈਆਇਆਉਹਸੀਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਅਧੀਨਕਾਰਵਾਈਵਿੱਚਤੀਜੀਧਿਰਵਜੋਂਮੁੱਦਈਦੀਸ਼ਕਤੀ।[264-ਐੱਫ-ਜੀ] Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) a [1998] 4 Ua. fF. 4. 138 ee i 6 Ard, 1998 - -_ > ~grreree offer, 1961 - ee 293,.132(11), (4), (4%), (5), (6) ait (7)ae 1326fafact uihar tect, 1908, at 9 sik 80] — ale — aot— Vad Ee 293 @ ania ae AHMI G aftenRa at on Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, at on Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, on Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, aifttert arr aren aa — ve, arr aren aa — ve, aren aa — ve, aa — ve, — ve, ve,We UVaART 132(5) H Hel W Wald WN — atat Sl ART 132(11) S BIAwl WEN cet afew.ar — ‘alg atte’ & citer carare it & |_a ae 1326 1326 pat err aftenRa at on Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, at on Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, on Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, Freer et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, et Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, Ey aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, aT 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, 132(5) & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, & sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, sreltt snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, snr aifttert arr aren aa — ve, aifttert arr aren aa — ve, arr aren aa — ve, aren aa — ve, aa — ve, — ve, ve, 5 - arat weaelt U4 4, fear@ fer ae wise fear| ard} ara fer at we Ueit at sapcilct"Mar & otk vaat wtaat war S ae mel F art at ae Ht ay aS GE ww ta@ ms of fae saa ae at SA ot @ ST aN anfe at Gat G aA SH ag af| Vatayazar wat amyeoy flr at sifteen 4 Ff| 1990 4 fhe at ay el UM Wg arGa aSya at often 4 at ag firert ael at yPrai ota sist Gt emer off| fog ferroeh oaftanal 4 a ga 3 ux oik GraS WW BM Sat Rar ak ara onferat B weseT awa ar at aftaeor ae fern rtet aor 2128 VA at| areal FT Sree arfrepretwaaTl arpS aley om & fay act wea st fre wa ae fem wa| fox adyaeit aatoll oar aga wr afte fear| aterelf 4 aftefra wr 8 arent GH are @ atax Praeryar aaa fea| fq ere va Ry aA & aage A ow ae gen sie aa adyoeelf 4 onirerrarer B Waa ae wige fear| anitaA ana afSPrat at ar 203 & afta Peter -arerera4 ag ae vert afta OF.8 ae weaoT wfeae fear| oni =a 4 aa aie af ara oT aitata- ae a at feat or wae era ze een fe et ory, A gu ae at waaafta ot at 132(5) & ait araee aftent & are do aex ot ore alk afar St1324 & ada orate+ wage fey ot S fag ooere wet eh| fox A, aie wa aaat132 Gtwae (5) o aie fey ay area w feet oro oes see on ade Fe agaage A TIENT (11) S ais Praast oe wend eff| et vet waa& fe Tere (11) daa we alesapawifta & fired freg cere ik aftuer a ariaot ag e sik free faeg GEN432(5) @ anita ores wa férar ver on| orffara at eer 132 at Tene (11) AF ong “alg aiawe Feat ¢ sik ey wales wt orewe at ondy & fay GRU aad By PA age a aT”TC _ | ~ . |. a _ geaan warmers Pofy afer [1998] 4 oH. fF. 4. 7 . Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) OU(HLOTSST Out] Dpenoorwiir, LouGesr LuGwewait) CHa! Fev Toorwir LOMMI torre 6, 1998 [LoTenTLLOG HS WT FH](HOD. FOOTHT on). Worms LOM MILo tg..Li). auiRloirot wing Ftd, 1967: titleysor 293,132 (B), 132 (4),(5), (7(11)-LOBIMILIL_() 255TOMU PAADY OFUIMGDOCST YHUVUGl WTDOM2MMUOUWIMIK QpPaA CLITHUBDATO HOL- CGHHUV LOM/LD LUMULPYUTOVHISMT 211 Hv CFTHR/SSAN AHWTOT ATIF K/ODOWTRV OFUIMILILIL_(b) GFBSBOUBSUILL LF - UDIUPHUV CSFUIMWILIFOR! LIBIGOD LWNZR/DSTS CATH LWBIULIL_LToNTier FOSTHT) LITSLILNT NSD OT QPS -— OURS (PSD CFTR!) LUITTUOMSGV, MPbSCEaTNSOSUTOTH! 132(3) tiflaiar SL Qwgnuurlt 2G57MOU LiesSTOTLIGITO LITTON (pla lui Hl.UW UNF FLAW - 2 NOUOCaTFUMT YRUBIUVTS FLIGRIOT SIP ANPBSUULL HFTMULI LIMWTLIDdS/, Lilley 2 eniwuiwun pool wpswnF FL_1_b, 1908-Lilfey G-AT BIP Yl CFUDCSFUGIFEEVITLD - 2 Newtwuiunr pont pwnFFt_lt_b, 1906 வTIOOD மMY1Dெசா1)6TIT6: ‘OTHDOOUMT( HLM- ClUM( mer LMM CHTSSLW - omiorest outle FlLey 132(11): eu(mLOTeT culls FLtwW, 1961 iltley 132 Qyor Sy omuworer ot! gdl6TOOTLIOU(HOOLWI lg WML] LOMMIL cusvils METTSHHOD COFMHOFwgrr. Qbs CFTZMoOrMled FAIS OBuUToIrbisor 2 orotlt wvuMlipsed Cewwoultor. alergeneotuile), OU) -ul_UImbs) OSUUMNMUHUTSON BMH HUTH HHOHFwWIoor pHoo wena M -se ClFrHSHSwieTOOTM| UTHAHCPUMW QoS. Gayl, Soul Hors) spor WHer, 1-9,L0 oLOM MDou AQ) TF oxLoo 6oren] Wi)HOTAH IhOOH LommFYHODSOHAA HouMenm 2 ulloo SarH5S(HHSIT; CLMulg GWCU MULLHUTOHAMW HUTH HHODWIOT UTHISTLIUIGE Y)\(HHHOT, Sour YHUTH GOUMTMILLI UHHH! CTOM! UMTHAHCPVW Qotl5HHIT. Q)omd M UARIOOM Bd StH, FLt_HSloor 132(9) UlMailosr Sip ah 2F5TOOM UIMINFH, HUTSON Dt UL UM (IPHov COFUWLIULL HBonoTrHH! COFTHHIDUAFHIOOMCU H5AAMUHHISDAOSIONEHOMM 2 FSSTONL LOT. oS)TWSHIAHUTOHIAMOM DA(HUILIG HBHOTM oumworer outl HslortlwlLw wOFWSIT, AF HTTSNSSUULL SHI. coToTCHM, OSUIUMNMUULL HHS OpuUFos! UBS 14 uae Car ursviulMalenesr upseq OSrLrhsrr. FLt_HSdlo293eig; Ulflailesr erpevip bF SS Coors Somr_Qewweiul earHTLIMNG BL CGFUISSUULL GI. TMMUTM TUNED, FonNoaHH MEMBWToUPA AHOHAHO FLULAHADI oor UlMlay 2ZI3er Sip CLITHHSHI oTosrMHITOYLD Q)Evenovd ofOTLIMHAA(HHAUL MHOUTUDAOMW or BtHAS LWTMLW MHITTHMHHSeu(mhioret ole FL tsdloor cLifley9) WIM MLD HHTOYHQ\M15IFOOT OO)OlaTASAaNEVE6T6oHiIQHLicmt_wiled, 9 wit HALWOTMLW FITL HA|WOTMHSS OT 29 FHTDH ILDHIHH(Q) 5 LTH] LILIEHOU (HOU TUIHAIHMNOUMTCLV(PENMUTL_(h) WsHNIENOU HHA CLV (IPEMMUTL_EML_ QBIIWHSHI, QS HA WOTML U 5Toy© 1.1. armoire Ae FL_tw, 1961 [270-G] Lila 293-cr Sip uipsaeq GlFWWLILILollevened sTeTM! 29 WT HSILWOTMLW WHMIW FIT H(Lplaoy ClFWIHH! HIWITWLILIHHHL 1.2 ¢L_LS Slot WMMey 132(5) qQeveg) FLL SSlooTMay 132B Boar Sip பிற IhL_61119 6)2 HATOUSBipOULPHAHFy ITLILIHIEONGMUDMLILIL WQ(hHATO HHS HATLIUTHorular allonoomon LWermub sSoumMlane owas. lltlay 293 6lev AHOUMTH, OHSF FLL SY MO)FWWHILILL_ othdSolouT(h WHILILIG) BVUG) 29 HSTOMOOLOTMMIMO sTHSOUMT(I 29 Memwulued HAWSTMHAD YW UYpSHS OHMLToTOOTM! 9)(HHH. QHlov “WHITH TOM urrroOsH FOMITHSUUL_ |},HSOH“O)FUICV(IPEON HL UGHAOAHOM oFTM OTTHODAHOM ClFMHBL2935) Ulloaileor Corea Q)UCGuTg FL_LSdoOT SIP oTHSGD oHlL_ UgHODOWULD 2 MTOM_AHUBNAH oOMUlMoyuHHSSUULOHoTHOT 2D HHSTOMMUL LAIDAD) OMUIUFMCHSTI Bovvgs! WIMMWeMLoi_@itb Syed. Ulla, 293 Waa @MUuTsS 2 rors) WMMID FLLdSoTHSSUULL Horus! Boor SYM ClFwwuuet 2X HHJoiloor HL CTHHOOUM(H HL OUDAOOASOWULD QAIbb] CMOBG616m oT O)HMDTL_ CTH Qh ULPHODH HTSHV COFWOUMHWYLW QuuysAoasrerarol270-C] E Raleigh Investment Co. Ltd.VS... BUTOTT-CO)MRTT RV Q)0T BO(1947)15 IR 332 (PC); BloevT WisverD )tb)o_L_ ..VS.. LOTBIC YT, (1965)56 TR 643 மMyin ulhabhai etcA VS.. LTBI YT, WSS Lig CGF & ANS.[1968]3SCR 662 = AIR (1969)SC 78,LV 60TLIDIDLIL TEIBOTIOITSR Lomb LivT ..VS.. uous Bool) Qegluir tommw ev48 1TR 598 WSTTM. HUSSNSSLUIMNL LF] LOTBIO HTH, UDLITUNGOCLUTS (2TH) .. VS.. DECWITEBST & sapoull’.609.19.47 206, CaIM/LIMFZGULI Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) aT”TC _ | ~ . |. a _ geaan warmers Pofy afer [1998] 4 oH. fF. 4. 7 . wt omen ax Wear & sik ara H waite age ong ox Goa81 Ta A ge WERan wét Gorn | wa aed afta wl anol a ot aftawr S weet aa & o, sfafrar$ wade! & anita Prefer wet 4 onvel gg oft ce ae fens ae wige Grd ae Peps weaca we O Rat ura Al HY Wat| ae as aay aa A Ue Sah F a Gar Mien waa afahasaT 1326) & anit araax atart S sre a se Un ap sried a waaGai erT|TR 293 Sa aa St ays wat Act| ae feet ae 4 Ret wRa at ord F a ae a Ga TA &5/14 @ star Bl Ut de wel aso B fearorsy we wet He Tedoft, wna Gel sfep wat 2128a oar O- ee ayser A werfda St ot aie afdPraq wt omer 132-H1 Goa(5) H seis amexO Tex et wt! arr 293 wie: fase F sik Vat wat Hig Woga vel &| ale sis: fetae @ wh ae Rat a see fea ore fH afarar F ani at Ws Hrdael A sew ot soa otiaa axa &. dt ae ae wey OM are wel eh| ada are 4, oie aagad sik ANGte, ast ar'atareat S wo A vseera wan S| wae@ afters we afaraa a art 132 4adm orfafeat at fear w ve fares fefoa eet erm RR aha wt aR 293 4stdftse aels at gfGS arqera wet ferar or erat| (Aer 9 alle 10) oT ae afrar et art 293 at oR aa ght feca ax a ag & fo was sirta afitiaa S ariaag ft ontad on wedt @ ok ae a feet area a sored a aahwel aH A difta ae oIae a met yd ae o sien ae ure fhe wa fa oaTs| ae feet on 4 faaaetea Wier an afer ea & fe oa wriaet a once or feet qe wearer ERI wige fy 7gae 4. otiaRa a sma fear or waar &| arr 293 farifese S alk aa feet GS ae or wise faUM Chor Ae wedt ferret sree, socal wa A oh, aferG aes at we fort oraa aSee arity fey zy fret rea a wataRe a aod oat 8 | ada ae 4% cere alle afterINI 132 Ht BIN(4)o> seis agenat ae aftfaksa fear war ree ser wane ferar faad: Sa fog we aravavel ar fs ae afifraay ait arr 132 Ht VII(7) S aes aal wi HisYe UN ot| aa, ex wad 4, seer aftert.& wa oriaeat' 8 qi: sara oft oie ae,OHsara aT AI al at ayaT 132(5) UW aad& anf H sane anata aftont Mt wise ere ox fey woeag of ena fg a sa wf wa gT132wy Ve-wraalHy Brees. (11) Ae-SoM ae y aa & age verse sie wea fags ox fate we fra oe earet wa @ fe anitrer Rear for are offer at arr 293 & areit afore wet at | (ORT 17) ae TUANN 24 aL 1904 S va Fela S favs wea d.s fread gu oer wae FB| fH, 1961 (ids afr) a err 2934 afteRerae wt gfe 8, aot araaS 2, Ten a1, aa d wes, 7 uae & eg Ome & fey ae wea fra| ettmica . 6 sik 7 Vi wae. aRWe, ano fed ufaa sik aime anger ust& ene waa Zawr atcielt F| uftardt Ht. 1 aile.2 aa @ deer as Fake wea Usasdahi ater aTs§ol ben.fe ae ater smart wt vrat vec set. 8, ya & safes wear U15 deteraot Gat Gt vet Y dart st| wfaaret G1 agere & raed anarita atk oRaR Suet - | * @ afFiay ot art 132% anit aarft afk aftaen at artagd at-né of aie Afra ane-O°laa Ft at 4 oe el ainqautt & feo& fery mela at eft | art ar Heat on fe weal ai.1 1938 4 yy ge ay ae fH Sa war Bas we 200 Het et aT Y Gh THAT SEA aT|Beet iala Gee wal aT arael alle see at Saat gue geft 8 ora dari a yAot dares cranial Bt yee was |e amp ae S far at aren Awe geraat ay10 PRA, 1990 Hi a AR | HST Bey SH EY IMPS aga sare, was a. 1 BH aie Fay| Ber Tame @ ferora-ar faire fer| we wes 14 Usa off ot are atte ited,4.18 5 et gPrat ff fe act at cia yPtrai-ef| ora: ge amysull @ 5/14 oiet Bt wera ot| feyawe oe fe favre et ong, array aftrent % 23 ar, 1990 a yer wierd S UE OK BIT Set|»fear ok ome onftredt S aeraer ot wot empl ah a afta we fore Bre aor 2128 WHan| aal t acre fs Sat syn& clergy ort & fey smear alert S waa vw anil wea A,- fog wert citer B gar we fear| va TaFY oraorgan, SSha, Haart 7 BD ARe aa.wert fear fer oeeT Are a Ana @ vitae Proer fear oT| SRO va ey a S age Ht gETél gor ike ary faPreaa we fora aan | gee aes oT ag ogo Vers Ba| SAA wat SG aie7a Rice afsrer ike Ht er 80} anita fee ante fear ake wes veeare wiger Roar |7 TATERE ERI Gad aa V wig fare wet Peer we en, fare ge wea S Pe et omySe GATarene fury Ot after H oy 1 are ob ifew ward 6 sie 7 at anita Peay| oe 7ae,1992 I “Urea 4 um odes fear fret afoPrad at ar 203 at sf S ale H aere UA ST AMice fen Ta a Lae aT ga WER eS|."3’ Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) Raleigh Investment Co. Ltd. v. Governor-General in Council, (1947) 15 E IR 332 (PC); Kamala Mills Ltd. v. State of Bombay, (1965) 56 TR 643 and Dulhabhai etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh &Am:, (1968) 3 SCR 662 =AIR (1969) SC 78, relied on. Ranganmal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (1963) 48 ITR 598 Mad. approved. F State of Bombay (Now Gujarat) v. Jagmohanda & Am:, (1966) 60 ITR 206, distinguished. 1.3. The direct effect of the decree in the suit would be that the gold ornaments, subject matter of the suit, would be taken out of the order of the Income Tax Officer under Section 132 (5) of the Act and would not be G available to be applied in proceedings under Section 132-B of the Act. It is immaterial if the proceeding under Section 132 gives no finality to the order passed under section 132(5) or 132(11) of the Act. It is not the case of the Revenue that Income Tax Authority can grant decree for partition. It is not also material for the decision of the case if the will now set up by the plaintiff H was genuine or not. The question that fell squarely for consideration was the ):... _ ~ ~ • right of the plaintiff as a third party in the proceedings under section 132 A of the Act. 1264-F-Gl 2. I. In the instant case, search and seizure were effected as per the provisions of the Act, assets and documents seized and statement of '8' recorded under sub-section (4) of Section 132 of the Act wherein he admitted B that the gold was acquired .from his and his brother's undisclosed income which he was even prepared to surrender to tax. It was thereafter in the course of further enquiry that he came up with a version that the gold ornaments in question belonged to his step-mother who bequeathed the same for the benefit of children of the plaintiff and other children that would be c born to the second wife of his father. This version did not find favour with the Income Tax Officer and he was not satisfied that gold ornaments in question did not belong to 'B'. It was, therefore, not necessary for him to issue any notice under sub-section (7) of Section 132 of the Act to the plaintiff. Moreover the plaintiff was well aware of the proceedings before the Income Tax Officer and she could have also filed objection to the order made D by the Income-Tax Officer under Section 132(5) of the Act to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner under sub-section (11) thereof. 1270-E-Gl 2.2. Sub-section (11) of Section 132 of the Act is not confined to only that person who was subjected to search and seizure operation and against E whom the order under sub-section 132(5) was passed. The words "any person" appearing in sub-section (11) are signifi~ant and even a third party can make an application to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner giving reasons for his objection to the order and seeking appropriate relief in the matter. This remedy the plaintiff did not avail. 1265-H; 266-AI p p 2.3. When the plaintiff was unable to get the release of the seized gold ornaments, allegedly belonging to her mother, under the provision of the Act, she could not by filing a partition suit indirectly get a decree to have a finding that the gold ornaments belonged to her mother and that she had right to claim her share therein. If she succeeds in her claim this will have G direct effect of getting that order of the Income-Tax Officer under Section 132(5) of the Act set aside or modified to that extent. This, section 293 does not permit. The decree if passed in a suit would not only effect 5/1,~th share of the plaintiff which she was seeking on partition of the gold ornaments, but also whole of the ornaments would get effected and taken out of the order H [1998) 2 S.C.R. A under sub-section (5) of Section 132 of the Act. [266-B-C) CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 142of1997. From the Judgment and Order dated 24.10.94 of the Orissa High Court in C.R. No. 6of1993. B Ranbir Chandra, C.V.S. Rao, (Ms. Shashi Kiran) and B.K. Prasad for the Appellants. N.K. Bisht, (NP) for the Respondents. Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) O)HMDTL_ CTH Qh ULPHODH HTSHV COFWOUMHWYLW QuuysAoasrerarol270-C] E Raleigh Investment Co. Ltd.VS... BUTOTT-CO)MRTT RV Q)0T BO(1947)15 IR 332 (PC); BloevT WisverD )tb)o_L_ ..VS.. LOTBIC YT, (1965)56 TR 643 மMyin ulhabhai etcA VS.. LTBI YT, WSS Lig CGF & ANS.[1968]3SCR 662 = AIR (1969)SC 78,LV 60TLIDIDLIL TEIBOTIOITSR Lomb LivT ..VS.. uous Bool) Qegluir tommw ev48 1TR 598 WSTTM. HUSSNSSLUIMNL LF] LOTBIO HTH, UDLITUNGOCLUTS (2TH) .. VS.. DECWITEBST & sapoull’.609.19.47 206, CaIM/LIMFZGULI 1.3 psd UIMUUISSUULL HTLIUTHoorumicsr CHILE HTHAHAWTOOTH!FIOUBHUULL FSHIH OBUTOHIAM oi(mhworer ot! 9s SrMwre FLtAHASLiflailesr SL sTHSSALIUL OW (HHSTOYIW, CLOMU FHS BuTormbisoet. HL Ul SoObAMET HIP 2 1 UHSHSULFlt ddloor May 132(5) gs e132(11)er Sip Qwmymvute 2 F5TYSHHR MMe 13207 Sp THSSUULL HLOIQQ\MIDIH HOTEOWEOW QBorlsAHoUvENe oroTuH! (PSDWLWNHMOA). UTHSM SOTOOU OU(MHLOTST OUT] DpeMoxrwilD NULPHIA (LPHIEMoOLILiIT(h) Q)evemed. ouTdslwired HMOUITIPSH! (PD SHOTSMOMWITSTAHAT QVENVUIT sTOTHIA] MPAA (plansATorun EF 6)SBLIGow esCxseir6TOST ODTOuitley132 (3)LpIhL_OULG HO)CLPOTMHTLULMOTT ேசர OTICEஉாிைம 2oforarQ)evemovuir’? sTosTLid| Hiro. 2.1 Q)bds opasdled, FLLSdloor olldlGotlosruilg CHHHO O)FWWHLILL SAI. OFTHFIASOM WMMIW QBpooorbiser UM (ipHevFLL SS or 132015) UMailet giemonrLitilfey (4) Q)oor Sip ‘Lil ulooGFWWHULL FJ. BHU FASO OSWSAUUHHSSUULL ATH Qo sQuijHoO\SMHour onnibdb Hors Foargztler Sovehwl_uur_rs aAumworeOAUTHSIULL STS Quydso)areoriiorr. Qour hlayjne ot GeqyOG ueHHOOTLIM Gey] ol) FI en oCUTHIS TOGCLOMLHIDHUTOIHDM HUTH WIMNMTHSTWAT OFTHHWTOTH] oTOTM) HOT am UCarenth) MbsTT. Qor BonH ourdluloor GpHoOFSOT WHMILWeMnrs»ransas UMSHWO UM GHHOHHoMlooT Hvis D2 _uslev or(lpdEgtolsarr. Hoss QOH udslod oHorer of) QslarMul_hH OAHTMu CluMmaivencn. Goa Carola gtru FHI OQBupoorbiser Li)5G OFTHHeTOTUD Hour AHWenr_wailevensv. crore, FL_e_Hssloor wiltHKIOMoVTLILitley (7) Qjosr Sip Qooudl outTH HAG o1HH QM ONvLiHUF WM VEMEd. CGLOGYILD, U(HLOTest out) SS GBIMWTEo oTHSASHUSH ord! HTH QD HHHOUT, FLt_HSdlooT 132(5) UlMailosr Sip amwresr AASB OFWH 2 HASTYAAR BDCFuMoomMuuw, Homo Mey (11)-or HipHOOVEDLD DLENMTWUT HoVVF) OQponooruiilt_w ArHHVv OlFwWidlHb 2.2 Flidsdion Ulla 132 Bloor giomoortiilhea (11)-utg CLIM IPH HL UgsnbSAGH 2UCUHMHSSUULL HUT WHMIW Fiomonrciiildo L2 5HTOUIMUNGSSULIL_IhLI(hLD L_CUED TIMIHDLILIL_HIMSVTLILN Hey (11) Q)ev SHSreomrcinHwW erHHOlOUM( BHLU(MHCLPooTMTLD HTLIUOTT Gmrl_ HOVEMO BDenmoorur BovHL CFUMOMTAATO ATTOBAMAT Ir! HATHSMV COFWH, OHH allaguAdloMh) OU Iெபற 6) OSOTS6)FUIUIOU(Q) UMN BTT HOWoNISTTTLIWSTUHNDS ACS rererailevencv. |2Z00 2.3 THAWTV OSUUNMUULL FAIS OGUTOBAOM Bout CHM mous]HUTH) HUM HHAHF COFTHHW TOA oom] QO)HH FLiHASloor olldluiloor(PIEWTSOUTH), UTHLILIMoeHeT UPHOSH HATHASDV O)FUOUHOT CLYOHUTOBAM HbIAGOHMOL WH! 6TOM! Ah O09 HASTOMU WOMIPS(Plows). HHAOV DBOUCGHOLwW HU WMMIW BHO Hor UbIMSS GS2Hemi 2 or(h). QFour Fors) Gartlaemauiled Claimm! Glummmre,132(5) Q)or Sip amhuorer of gdlarMulor 9155 2 F5TOMOO HorotOVILOT MMO)FWILவிைளைவேயா OTM LI(h\இைத, uitley293 FOI AATHI.69 OULD] 6Fy ITLILIlen M CoMMLILIL_5 IBAHupoTbisooar UAUdso Qour CarMulmHps urgdslulor 0/14 uBimsu urglETOSTLIF] LOL_(HLDOVEVITLOSD, (LP(LP DALIT OOTHIACHLCoahCummMuu)ib srostus! Ft HSloor May 132 Bost Hiomosrvivilf[266-பி-சி] 2Meniulwied CLosv(iipemmutth) B: 199/ Q)or 2MenoullGwwevipemmul(h) crov aher 29 wr HhdAlWoTMsHds oor 24.10.94 ond Caadlulet Fr2D HASTOUV 9)(HHH] F1.9,17. ot-oOl (hIbHI 6T(L Tour FHS TT, F.oil.crow. Frou, (ClFovail. agag) H)revor) commit L.AHACWTTHOT CW(PonmMul LL reorrsoOH GCwevipenmuf() ClewWiuouraHer. oro.Ce. lage, (NP) ord)DOr. Gwureu ClororaruiTe! WmMMb OB7.CKE.45u7 HSlWOTMSS AUpMSSTS HWW SSIUL LTTE. IhHLWSTM HAD 8 F TL MSSlooLTT HAWwWTET HH. o.Ll. urHour Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) ਇਹਸਵਾਲਜੋਸਿੱਧੇਤੌਰ'ਤੇਵਿਚਾਰਨਲਈਆਇਆਉਹਸੀਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਅਧੀਨਕਾਰਵਾਈਵਿੱਚਤੀਜੀਧਿਰਵਜੋਂਮੁੱਦਈਦੀਸ਼ਕਤੀ।[264-ਐੱਫ-ਜੀ] 2.1. ਤਤਕਾਲਮਾਮਲੇਵਿੱਚ, ਐਕਟਦੇਉਪਬੰਧਾਂ, ਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂਅਤੇਦਸਤਾਵੇਜ਼ਾਂਨੂੰਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੇਗਏਅਤੇਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(4) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਦਰਜ'ਬੀ' ਦੇਬਿਆਨਦੇਅਨੁਸਾਰਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀਕੀਤੀਗਈ, ਜਿਸਵਿੱਚਉਸਨੇਮੰਨਿਆਕਿਸੋਨਾਉਸਦੀਅਤੇਉਸਦੇਭਰਾਦੀਅਣਦੱਸੀਆਮਦਨਤੋਂਪ੍ਰਾਪਤਕੀਤਾਗਿਆਸੀਜਿਸਨੂੰਉਹਟੈਕਸਦੇਅਧੀਨਕਰਨਲਈਵੀਤਿਆਰਸੀ।ਇਸਤੋਂਬਾਅਦਹੋਰਪੁੱਛਗਿੱਛਦੌਰਾਨਉਹਇੱਕਸੰਸਕਰਣਲੈਕੇਆਇਆਕਿਸਵਾਲਵਿੱਚਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਦੀਮਤਰੇਈਮਾਂਦੇਸਨਜਿਸਨੇਮੁੱਦਈਦੇਬੱਚਿਆਂਅਤੇਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਦੂਜੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਪੈਦਾਹੋਣਵਾਲੇਹੋਰਬੱਚਿਆਂਦੇਲਾਭਲਈਇਹਵਸੀਅਤਕੀਤੀਸੀ।ਇਸਸੰਸਕਰਣਨੂੰਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੀਪਸੰਦਨਹੀਂਆਈਅਤੇਉਹਇਸਗੱਲਤੋਂਸੰਤੁਸ਼ਟਨਹੀਂਸੀਕਿਸਵਾਲਵਿੱਚਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇ'ਬੀ' ਦੇਨਹੀਂਹਨ।ਇਸਲਈ, ਉਸਲਈਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(7) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਮੁੱਦਈਨੂੰਕੋਈਨੋਟਿਸਜਾਰੀਕਰਨਾਜ਼ਰੂਰੀਨਹੀਂਸੀ।ਇਸਤੋਂਇਲਾਵਾ, ਮੁੱਦਈਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੇਸਾਹਮਣੇਹੋਣਵਾਲੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਤੋਂਚੰਗੀਤਰ੍ਹਾਂਜਾਣੂਸੀਅਤੇਉਹਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੁਆਰਾਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਦਿੱਤੇਗਏਹੁਕਮ'ਤੇਇਤਰਾਜ਼ਵੀਦਰਜਕਰਸਕਦੀਸੀ।[270-ਈ-ਜੀ] 2.2. ਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(11) ਸਿਰਫ਼ਉਸਵਿਅਕਤੀਤੱਕਸੀਮਤਨਹੀਂਹੈਜਿਸਦੀਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀ--ਕਾਰਵਾਈਕੀਤੀਗਈਸੀਅਤੇਜਿਸਦੇਵਿਰੁੱਧਉਪਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਹੁਕਮਪਾਸਕੀਤਾਗਿਆਸੀ।ਉਪਧਾਰਾ(11) ਵਿੱਚਦਿਖਾਈਦੇਣਵਾਲੇ"ਕੋਈਵੀਵਿਅਕਤੀ" ਸ਼ਬਦਮਹੱਤਵਪੂਰਨਹਨਅਤੇਇੱਥੋਂਤੱਕਕਿਕੋਈਤੀਜੀਧਿਰਵੀਮੁੱਖਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰਜਾਂਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰਨੂੰਹੁਕਮ'ਤੇਆਪਣੇਇਤਰਾਜ਼ਦੇਕਾਰਨਦੱਸਕੇਅਤੇਮਾਮਲੇਵਿੱਚਢੁਕਵੀਂਰਾਹਤਦੀਮੰਗਕਰਕੇਅਰਜ਼ੀਦੇਸਕਦੀਹੈ।ਇਸਉਪਾਅਦਾਮੁੱਦਈਨੂੰਲਾਭਨਹੀਂਹੋਇਆ।[265-ਐੱਚ; 266-ਏ] 2.3. ਜਦੋਂਮੁਦਈਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੇਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਨੂੰਐਕਟਦੇਉਪਬੰਧਅਧੀਨ, ਜੋਕਥਿਤਤੌਰ'ਤੇਉਸਦੀਮਾਂਦੇਸਨ,'ਛੁਡਾਉਣਵਿੱਚਅਸਮਰੱਥਸੀ, ਤਾਂਉਹਵੰਡਦਾਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਦਾਇਰਕਰਕੇਅਸਿੱਧੇਤੌਰਤੇਇਹਫੈਸਲਾਲੈਣਲਈਇੱਕਡਿਕਰੀਪ੍ਰਾਪਤਨਹੀਂਕਰਸਕਦੀਸੀਕਿਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਦੀਮਾਂਦੇਸਨਅਤੇਉਸਨੂੰਇਸਵਿੱਚਆਪਣਾਹਿੱਸਾਦਾਅਵਾਕਰਨਦਾਅਧਿਕਾਰਸੀ।ਜੇਕਰਉਹਆਪਣੇਦਾਅਵੇਵਿੱਚਸਫਲਹੋਜਾਂਦੀਹੈਤਾਂਇਸਦਾਸਿੱਧਾਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੇਉਸਹੁਕਮਨੂੰਇੱਕਪਾਸੇਰੱਖਣਜਾਂਉਸਹੱਦਤੱਕਸੋਧਣਦਾਹੋਵੇਗਾ।ਇਹ, ਧਾਰਾ293 ਇਜਾਜ਼ਤਨਹੀਂਦਿੰਦੀ।ਜੇਕਰਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਵਿੱਚਪਾਸਕੀਤਾਗਿਆਡਿਕਰੀਨਾਸਿਰਫ਼ਮੁਦਈਦੇ5/14 ਵੇਂਹਿੱਸੇਨੂੰਪ੍ਰਭਾਵਤਕਰੇਗਾਜੋਉਹਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਵੰਡ'ਤੇਮੰਗਰਹੀਸੀ, ਸਗੋਂਪੂਰੇਗਹਿਣੇਵੀਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(5) ਦੇਅਧੀਨਹੁਕਮਤੋਂਬਾਹਰਹੋਜਾਣਗੇਅਤੇਹਟਾਦਿੱਤੇਜਾਣਗੇ।[266-ਬੀ-ਸੀ] ਸਿਵਲਅਪੀਲਅਧਿਕਾਰਖੇਤਰ: ਸਿਵਲਅਪੀਲਨੰਬਰ142 ਆਫ਼1997। ਸੁਪਰੀਮਕੋਰਟਰਿਪੋਰਟਾਂ[1998) 2 ਐਸ.ਸੀ.ਆਰ ਉੜੀਸਾਹਾਈਕੋਰਟਦੇ24.10.94 ਦੇਫੈਸਲੇਅਤੇਆਦੇਸ਼ਤੋਂ, ਸੀ.ਆਰ. ਨੰਬਰ6 ਆਫ਼1993 ਵਿੱਚ। ਅਪੀਲਕਰਤਾਵਾਂਲਈਰਣਬੀਰਚੰਦਰ, ਸੀ.ਵੀ.ਐਸ. ਰਾਓ, (ਸ਼੍ਰੀਮਤੀਸ਼ਸ਼ੀਕਿਰਨ) ਅਤੇਬੀ.ਕੇ. ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦ। ਉੱਤਰਦਾਤਾਵਾਂਲਈਐਨ.ਕੇ. ਬਿਸ਼ਟ, (ਐਨਪੀ)। ਅਦਾਲਤਦੁਆਰਾਨਿਯੁਕਤਐਮੀਕਸਕਿਊਰੀਲਈਜੋਸਫ਼ਵੇਲਾਪਾਲੀਅਤੇਆਰ.ਕੇ. ਕਪੂਰ। ਅਦਾਲਤਦਾਫੈਸਲਾਡੀ.ਪੀ. ਵਾਧਵਾ, ਜੇ. ਦੁਆਰਾਸੁਣਾਇਆਗਿਆ। ਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਭੁਵਨੇਸ਼ਵਰਅਤੇਭਾਰਤਸਰਕਾਰਦੇਵਿੱਤਮੰਤਰਾਲੇਨੇਉੜੀਸਾਹਾਈਕੋਰਟਦੇ24 ਅਕਤੂਬਰ,1994 ਦੇਫੈਸਲੇਵਿਰੁੱਧਇਹਅਪੀਲਦਾਇਰਕੀਤੀਹੈ, ਜਿਸਨੂੰਹਾਈਕੋਰਟਨੇਉਨ੍ਹਾਂਦੀਸੋਧਨੂੰਖਾਰਜਕਰਦਿੱਤਾਅਤੇਅਧੀਨਅਦਾਲਤਦੇਹੁਕਮਦੀਪੁਸ਼ਟੀਕੀਤੀਜਿਸਵਿੱਚਮਾਲਵਿਭਾਗਦੀਇਸਦਲੀਲਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਦਿੱਤਾਗਿਆਸੀਕਿਪਹਿਲੇਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਦੁਆਰਾਦਾਇਰਵੰਡਲਈਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਆਮਦਨਕਰਐਕਟ, 1961 (ਛੋਟੇਲਈ, 'ਐਕਟ') ਦੀਧਾਰਾ293ਵਿੱਚਪਾਬੰਦੀਦੇਮੱਦੇਨਜ਼ਰਬਰਕਰਾਰਨਹੀਂਸੀ। ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਨੰਬਰ1, ਮੁਦਈਦੇਤੌਰ'ਤੇ, 7 ਮੁਦਈਆਂਦੇਵਿਰੁੱਧਵੰਡਲਈਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਦਾਇਰਕੀਤਾਗਿਆ, ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀ6ਅਤੇ7 ਕ੍ਰਮਵਾਰਵਿੱਤਸਕੱਤਰਅਤੇਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਉੜੀਸਾਰਾਹੀਂਭਾਰਤਸਰਕਾਰਦੇਸੰਘਹਨ, ਜੋਹੁਣਸਾਡੇਸਾਹਮਣੇਅਪੀਲਕਰਤਾਹਨ।ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀ1 ਅਤੇ2 ਮਤਰੇਏਭਰਾਹਨਅਤੇਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀ3 ਤੋਂ5 ਮੁਦਈਦੀਆਂਮਤਰੇਈਆਂਭੈਣਾਂਹਨ।ਮੁੱਦਈਨੇਕਿਹਾਕਿਉਹਆਪਣੀਪਹਿਲੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਬੰਸੀਧਰਅਗਰਵਾਲਦੀਧੀਸੀ, ਜਦੋਂਕਿ, ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀ1 ਤੋਂ5, ਉਸਦੀਦੂਜੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਬੰਸੀਧਰਅਗਰਵਾਲਦੇਬੱਚੇਸਨ।ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਨੰਬਰ1 ਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਹੈਜਿਸਦੇਰਿਹਾਇਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਵਪਾਰਕਸਥਾਨਾਂਦੀਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੇਤਹਿਤਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਕੀਤੀਗਈਸੀਅਤੇਮੁੱਦਈਦੁਆਰਾਦਾਇਰਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦਾਵਿਸ਼ਾਵਸਤੂ, ਕੁਝਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਸਮੇਤਕਈਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂਨੂੰਜ਼ਬਤਕਰਲਿਆਗਿਆਸੀ।ਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਵਿੱਚਮੁੱਦਈਨੇਉਨ੍ਹਾਂਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਵੰਡਲਈਪ੍ਰਾਰਥਨਾਕੀਤੀਸੀ।ਮੁੱਦਈਨੇਕਿਹਾਕਿਉਸਦੀਮਾਂਦੀਮੌਤ 1938 ਵਿੱਚਹੋਈਸੀਅਤੇਉਸਸਮੇਂਉਸਕੋਲ200 ਤੋਲੇਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਸਨਜੋਉਸਦਾਸਤ੍ਰੀਧਨਸੀ।ਉਸਦੀਮਾਂਨੇਇੱਕਵਸੀਅਤਬਣਾਈਜਿਸਵਿੱਚਮੁੱਦਈਅਤੇਉਸਦੀਦੂਜੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਬੰਸੀਧਰਦੇਹੋਰਬੱਚਿਆਂਨੂੰਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਦੀਦੂਜੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਮਿਲਦੇਹਨਤਾਂਜੋਉਨ੍ਹਾਂਦੀਆਂਧੀਆਂਦੀਦਾਜਦੀਮੰਗਅਤੇਵਿਆਹਦੀਆਂਜ਼ਰੂਰਤਾਂਨੂੰਪੂਰਾਕੀਤਾਜਾਸਕੇ।ਇਹਗਹਿਣੇਮੁੱਦਈਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਹਿਰਾਸਤਵਿੱਚਰੱਖੇਗਏਸਨਜਿਸਦੀਮੌਤ10 ਫਰਵਰੀ, 1990 ਨੂੰਹੋਈਸੀ।ਉਸਦੀਮੌਤਤੋਂਬਾਅਦਗਹਿਣੇਬਾਬੂਲਾਦੀਹਿਰਾਸਤਵਿੱਚਆਗਏ! ਅਗਾਈਵਾਲ, ਪਹਿਲਾਮੁਦਾਲਾ। ਪਰਿਵਾਰਨੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਵੰਡਕਰਨਦਾਫੈਸਲਾਕੀਤਾ।ਉਸਸਮੇਂ14 ਪੋਤੀਆਂਸਨਜੋਮੁਦਈਅਤੇਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀ1 ਤੋਂ5ਦੀਆਂਧੀਆਂਸਨ।ਕਿਉਂਕਿਮੁਦਈਦੀਆਂ5 ਧੀਆਂਸਨ, ਇਸਲਈਉਹਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਵਿੱਚ5/14ਵੇਂਹਿੱਸੇਦੀਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਭੁਵਨੇਸ਼ਵਾਬਨਾਮਪਰਮੇਸ਼ਵਰੀਦੇਵੀਸੁਲਤਾਨੀਆ[ਡੀ.ਪੀ. ਵਧਵਾ, ਜੇ.] Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) ਪਰਿਵਾਰਨੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਵੰਡਕਰਨਦਾਫੈਸਲਾਕੀਤਾ।ਉਸਸਮੇਂ14 ਪੋਤੀਆਂਸਨਜੋਮੁਦਈਅਤੇਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀ1 ਤੋਂ5ਦੀਆਂਧੀਆਂਸਨ।ਕਿਉਂਕਿਮੁਦਈਦੀਆਂ5 ਧੀਆਂਸਨ, ਇਸਲਈਉਹਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਵਿੱਚ5/14ਵੇਂਹਿੱਸੇਦੀਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਭੁਵਨੇਸ਼ਵਾਬਨਾਮਪਰਮੇਸ਼ਵਰੀਦੇਵੀਸੁਲਤਾਨੀਆ[ਡੀ.ਪੀ. ਵਧਵਾ, ਜੇ.] ਹੱਕਦਾਰਸੀ।ਪਰਵੰਡਹੋਣਤੋਂਪਹਿਲਾਂ, ਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਨੇ23 ਮਾਰਚ, 1990 ਨੂੰਪਹਿਲੇਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਦੇਘਰਛਾਪਾਮਾਰਿਆਅਤੇ2128 ਗ੍ਰਾਮਵਜ਼ਨਵਾਲੇਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਜ਼ਬਤਕਰਲਏ।ਮੁਦਈਨੇਕਿਹਾਕਿਉਸਨੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਵਾਪਸੀਲਈਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਦੇਸਾਹਮਣੇਪਟੀਸ਼ਨਦਾਇਰਕੀਤੀਸੀਪਰਉਸਨੇਇਨਕਾਰਕਰਦਿੱਤਾ।ਫਿਰਮੁਦਈਨੇਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਪ੍ਰਤੀਵਾਦੀਨੰਬਰ7, ਉੜੀਸਾਨੂੰਇੱਕਨੋਟਿਸਜਾਰੀਕੀਤਾ, ਜਿਸਨੇਦੋਸ਼ਲਗਾਇਆਹੈਕਿਉਸਨੂੰਭਰੋਸਾਦਿੱਤਾਕਿਉਸਦੇਦਾਅਵੇਨਾਲਨਿਆਂਕੀਤਾਜਾਵੇਗਾਅਤੇਕਿਹਾਸੀਕਿਉਸਦੇਕੇਸਦਾਨਿਪਟਾਰਾਤਿੰਨ-ਮਹੀਨਿਆਂਦੇਅੰਦਰਕੀਤਾਜਾਵੇਗਾ।ਯਾਦਦਹਾਨੀਆਂਦੇਬਾਵਜੂਦਕੁਝਨਹੀਂਹੋਇਆਅਤੇਕੋਈਫੈਸਲਾਨਹੀਂਲਿਆਗਿਆ।ਇਸਨਾਲਮੁਦਈਨੂੰਕਾਰਵਾਈਦਾਕਾਰਨਮਿਲਿਆ।ਉਸਨੇਸਿਵਲਪ੍ਰੋਸੀਜ਼ਰਕੋਡਦੀਧਾਰਾ80 ਦੇਤਹਿਤਬਚਾਅਪੱਖ6 ਅਤੇ7 'ਤੇਨੋਟਿਸਦਿੱਤਾਅਤੇਇਸਤੋਂਬਾਅਦਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਦਾਇਰਕੀਤਾ। ਤੱਥਾਂਤੋਂ, ਇਹਬਿਲਕੁਲਸਪੱਸ਼ਟਹੈਕਿਮੁਦਈਨੇਵੰਡਲਈਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਦਾਇਰਨਹੀਂਕੀਤਾਹੋਵੇਗਾਕਿਉਂਕਿਉਸਦੇਹੋਰਰਿਸ਼ਤੇਦਾਰਾਂਦੁਆਰਾਉਸਦੇਦਾਅਵੇ'ਤੇਕੋਈਵਿਵਾਦਨਹੀਂਸੀਪਰਇਸਤੱਥਲਈਕਿਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਸਮੇਂਆਮਦਨਕਰਵਿਭਾਗਦੀਹਿਰਾਸਤਵਿੱਚਸਨ।ਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦੇਨੋਟਿਸਬਚਾਓਪੱਖ6 ਅਤੇ7 'ਤੇਜਾਰੀਕੀਤੇਗਏਸਨ।ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂਨੇ7ਅਗਸਤ, 1992 ਨੂੰਅਦਾਲਤਵਿੱਚਇੱਕਅਰਜ਼ੀਦਾਇਰਕੀਤੀਸੀਜਿਸਵਿੱਚਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ293 ਦੇਮੱਦੇਨਜ਼ਰ:ਮੁਕੱਦਮੇਦੀਕਾਇਮਰਹਿਣਯੋਗਤਾਨੂੰਚੁਣੌਤੀਦਿੱਤੀਗਈਸੀ।ਧਾਰਾਇਸਪ੍ਰਕਾਰਹੈ "293. ਸਿਵਲਅਦਾਲਤਾਂਵਿੱਚਮੁਕੱਦਮਿਆਂਦਾਬਾਰ।ਇਸਐਕਟਅਧੀਨਕੀਤੀਗਈਕਿਸੇਵੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਜਾਂਆਦੇਸ਼ਨੂੰਰੱਦਕਰਨਜਾਂਸੋਧਣਲਈਕਿਸੇਵੀਸਿਵਲਅਦਾਲਤਵਿੱਚਕੋਈਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਨਹੀਂਲਿਆਂਦਾਜਾਵੇਗਾ, ਅਤੇਇਸਐਕਟਅਧੀਨਚੰਗੀਭਾਵਨਾਨਾਲਕੀਤੇਗਏਜਾਂਕੀਤੇਜਾਣਦੇਇਰਾਦੇਨਾਲਕੀਤੇਗਏਕਿਸੇਵੀਕੰਮਲਈਸਰਕਾਰਜਾਂਸਰਕਾਰ"ਦੇਕਿਸੇਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਵਿਰੁੱਧਕੋਈਮੁਕੱਦਮਾ, ਮੁਕੱਦਮਾਜਾਂਹੋਰਕਾਰਵਾਈਨਹੀਂਹੋਵੇਗੀ।ਇਸਮਾਮਲੇਨੂੰਕਿਉਂਕਾਇਮਰੱਖਣਯੋਗਨਹੀਂਸੀ, ਇਸਲਈਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੇਤਹਿਤਕੀਤੇਗਏਕਾਰਜਾਂਅਤੇਐਕਟਅਧੀਨਉਨ੍ਹਾਂਕਾਰਵਾਈਆਂਵਿੱਚਪਾਸਕੀਤੇਗਏਆਦੇਸ਼ਦਾਹਵਾਲਾਦਿੱਤਾਗਿਆਸੀ।ਆਮਦਨਕਰ(ਜਾਂਚ)ਡਾਇਰੈਕਟਰ, ਹੈਦਰਾਬਾਦਦੁਆਰਾਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(1) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਜਾਰੀਅਧਿਕਾਰਦੇਤਹਿਤ, ਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਦੇਰਿਹਾਇਸ਼-ਕਮ-ਕਾਰੋਬਾਰੀਅਹਾਤੇਅਤੇਉਸਕੰਪਨੀਦੇਵਪਾਰਕਅਹਾਤੇਵਿੱਚਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਆਂਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂਜਿਸਦੇਉਹਪ੍ਰਬੰਧਨਿਰਦੇਸ਼ਕਸਨ।ਆਂਧਰਾਬੈਂਕਵਿੱਚਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਅਤੇਉਸਦੇਭਰਾਗਿਰਧਾਰੀਲਾਲਦੇਨਾਮ'ਤੇਦੋਬੈਂਕਲਾਕਰਾਂਦੀਵੀਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਲਈਗਈ।ਇਹਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਆਂ23 ਮਾਰਚ, 1990 ਤੋਂ26 ਮਾਰਚ, 1990 ਤੱਕਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂ।ਨਕਦੀ, ਗਹਿਣੇ, ਹੀਰੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇ, ਚਾਂਦੀਦੇਸਿੱਕੇਅਤੇਪਿੰਨੀਆਂਮਿਲੀਆਂਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂ।ਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(4) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਦਾਬਿਆਨਦਰਜਕੀਤਾਗਿਆ।ਨਕਦੀਅਤੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੇਸੰਬੰਧਵਿੱਚਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਨੇ7,00,000 ਰੁਪਏਦੀਆਮਦਨਛੁਪਾਉਣਦੀਗੱਲਸਵੀਕਾਰਕੀਤੀਜੋਕਿਉਸਦੇਅਨੁਸਾਰ515 ਤੋਲੇਤੋਂਵੱਧਮਿਲੇਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਕੀਮਤਸੀਜਿਸਦਾਖੁਲਾਸਾਉਸਨੇਅਤੇਉਸਦੇਪਰਿਵਾਰਕਮੈਂਬਰਾਂਨੇ-ਆਪਣੀਜਾਇਦਾਦਟੈਕਸਰਿਟਰਨਵਿੱਚਕੀਤਾਸੀ।ਉਸਨੇਰੁਪਏਦੀਵਾਧੂਆਮਦਨਦੀਪੇਸ਼ਕਸ਼ਕੀਤੀ।ਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦੀਪ੍ਰਾਪਤੀਵਿੱਚਅਣਦੱਸੇਨਿਵੇਸ਼ ਸੁਪਰੀਮਕੋਰਟਰਿਪੋਰਟਾਂ[1998) 2 ਐਸ.ਸੀ.ਆਰ ਦੇਕਾਰਨਉਸਦੇਨਾਮ'ਤੇ3,50,000 ਰੁਪਏਅਤੇਇੰਨੀਹੀਰਕਮਉਸਦੇਭਰਾਦੇਨਾਮ'ਤੇਸੀ।ਜਾਂਚਦੌਰਾਨ, ਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਨੇਲਿਖਤੀਦਲੀਲਵੀਦਿੱਤੀ।ਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਬਾਰੇ, ਹੁਣਉਸਦਾਪੱਖਇਹਸੀਕਿ2128 ਗ੍ਰਾਮਭਾਰਵਾਲੇਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਮਨੀਦੇਵੀਦੇਸਨਜੋਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਪਹਿਲੀਪਤਨੀਸੀਅਤੇਉਸਦੀਇੱਛਾਅਨੁਸਾਰ, ਉਸਦਾਪਿਤਾਮੁੱਦਈਵੱਲੋਂਇਸਗਹਿਣਿਆਂਦਾਰਖਵਾਲਾਸੀਜੋਉਸਦੀਪਹਿਲੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਇਕਲੌਤੀਧੀਸੀਅਤੇਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੇਦੁਬਾਰਾਵਿਆਹਤੋਂਬਾਅਦਪ੍ਰਾਪਤਹੋਣਵਾਲੇਬੱਚਿਆਂਵੱਲੋਂਵੀ।ਉਸਦੀਦਲੀਲਸੀਕਿਇਹਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੁਆਰਾਰੱਖੇਗਏਸਨਜੋਹੁਣਜ਼ਿੰਦਾਨਹੀਂਹਨ।ਜਾਂਚਪੂਰੀਹੋਣਤੋਂਬਾਅਦ, ਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਨੇਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132(5)ਦੇਤਹਿਤਇੱਕਆਦੇਸ਼ਪਾਸਕੀਤਾਜਿਸਵਿੱਚਕਿਹਾਗਿਆਕਿਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਦੀਆਂਟੈਕਸ, ਵਿਆਜਅਤੇਜੁਰਮਾਨੇਦੇਕਾਰਨਕੁੱਲਦੇਣਦਾਰੀਆਂ56,95,079 ਰੁਪਏਹੋਗਈਆਂਹਨਜਿਸਦੇਮੁਕਾਬਲੇਉਸਤੋਂਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂਦੀਕੀਮਤ20,49,694 ਰੁਪਏਹੈ।ਇਸਲਈ, ਉਸਨੇਨਿਰਦੇਸ਼ਦਿੱਤਾਕਿਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀਕਾਰਵਾਈਦੌਰਾਨਜ਼ਬਤਕੀਤੀਆਂਗਈਆਂਸਾਰੀਆਂਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂ, ਜਿਸਵਿੱਚਸਵਾਲਵਿੱਚਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਵੀਸ਼ਾਮਲਹਨ, ਨੂੰਵਿਭਾਗਕੋਲਰੱਖਿਆਜਾਵੇ।ਆਮਦਨਕਰਅਧਿਕਾਰੀਨੇਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਦੇਇਸਬਿਆਨ'ਤੇਵਿਸ਼ਵਾਸਨਹੀਂਕੀਤਾਕਿਸਵਾਲਵਿੱਚਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇਉਸਦੀਮਤਰੇਈਮਾਂਦੀਮਲਕੀਅਤਸਨਅਤੇਉਹਇਸਨੂੰਆਪਣੀਧੀਅਤੇਹੋਰਬੱਚਿਆਂਵਿੱਚਕਿਵੇਂਵੰਡਣਾਚਾਹੁੰਦੀਸੀਜੋਉਸਦੇਪਤੀਦੀਦੂਜੀਪਤਨੀਤੋਂਪੈਦਾਹੋਸਕਦੇਹਨ। ਬਾਬੂਲਾਲਦੇਅਨੁਸਾਰ, ਉਸਦੇਦੂਜੇਸੰਸਕਰਣਦੇਅਨੁਸਾਰ, ਸੋਨੇਦੇਗਹਿਣੇ1938 ਤੋਂ1990 ਤੱਕਉਸਦੇਪਿਤਾਦੀਹਿਰਾਸਤਵਿੱਚਰਹੇ, ਜਦੋਂਉਸਦੀਮੌਤਹੋਗਈ, ਬਿਨਾਂਇਸਦੀਵਰਤੋਂਉਸਦੀਮਤਰੇਈਮਾਂ, ਮੁਦਈਦੀਕੁਦਰਤੀਮਾਂਦੀਇੱਛਾਅਨੁਸਾਰਕੀਤੇਗਏ।ਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(5) ਦੇਅਧੀਨਆਦੇਸ਼ਦੁਆਰਾਬਰਕਰਾਰਰੱਖੀਗਈਜਾਇਦਾਦਾਂਨੂੰਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132ਬੀਦੇਉਪਬੰਧਾਂਦੇਅਨੁਸਾਰਨਜਿੱਠਿਆਜਾਣਾਹੈ। ਐਕਟਦੀਧਾਰਾ132 ਦੀਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(5) ਦੇਅਧੀਨਪਾਸਕੀਤੇਗਏਆਦੇਸ਼'ਤੇਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰਨੂੰਉਪ-ਧਾਰਾ(11) ਦੇਤਹਿਤਇਤਰਾਜ਼ਕੀਤਾਜਾਸਕਦਾਹੈ।ਅਸੀਂਸੰਬੰਧਿਤਹਿੱਸੇਵਿੱਚਧਾਰਾ132 ਨੂੰਹੇਠਲਿਖੇਅਨੁਸਾਰਨਿਰਧਾਰਤਕਰਸਕਦੇਹਾਂ: "132. ਤਲਾਸ਼ੀਅਤੇਜ਼ਬਤੀ।- (1)... (2) ... (3)... ਆਮਦਨਕਰਕਮਿਸ਼ਨਰ, ਭੁਵਨੇਸ਼ਵਾਬਨਾਮਪਰਮੇਸ਼ਵਰੀਦੇਵੀਸੁਲਤਾਨੀਆ[ਡੀ.ਪੀ. ਵਧਵਾ, ਜੇ.] Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) [1998) 2 S.C.R. A under sub-section (5) of Section 132 of the Act. [266-B-C) CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 142of1997. From the Judgment and Order dated 24.10.94 of the Orissa High Court in C.R. No. 6of1993. B Ranbir Chandra, C.V.S. Rao, (Ms. Shashi Kiran) and B.K. Prasad for the Appellants. N.K. Bisht, (NP) for the Respondents. Joseph Vellapaly and R.K. Kapoor for the Amicus Curiae appointed by C the Court. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.P. WAD HWA, J. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhubaneshwar and Union of India, Ministry of Finance have filed this appeal against the judgment D dated October 24, 1994 of the Orissa High Court which the High Court dismissed their revision and affirmed the order of the subordinate court rejecting the plea of the Revenue that a suit for partition filed by the first respondent was not maintainable in view of the bar of in Section 293 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the 'Act'). E E Respondent No. 1, as the plaintiff, filed a suit for partition against 7 . defendants, defendants 6 and 7 being respectively Union of India through Finance Secretary and Commissioner oflncome Tax, Orissa, now the appellant before us. Defendants 1 and 2 are step-brothers and defendants 3 to 5 are step-sisters of the plaintiff. Plaintiff said that she was the daughter of Bansidhar Agarwal from his first wife, while, defendants 1 to 5 were the children of F Bansidhar Agarwal from his second wife. Defendant No. 1 is Babula! whose residential and business premises were subjected to search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act and various assets including certain gold ornaments, subject matter of ttie suit filed by the plaintiff, were seized. Jn the suit the plaintiff had prayed for partition of those very gold ornaments. G Plaintiff said that her mother died in 1938 and that at that time she was possessed of 200 to las of gold ornaments which was her stridhan. Her mother made a will bequeathing gold ornaments to the plaintiff and other children of Bansidhar form his second wife in proportion to number of daughters of each of such children to meet the dowry demand and marriage requirements of their daughters. These ornaments were kept in the custody of father of the plaintiff H who died on February I 0, 1990. After his death the ornaments came in the ;... • ..,._ custody of Babula! Agaiwal, the first defendant. The family decided to partition A the ornaments. At that time there were 14 grand-daughters who were the daughters of the plaintiff and defendants I to 5. Since the plaintiff had 5 daughters, she was entitled to 5/J 4th share in the ornaments. Bui before the partition could take place, Income Tax Officer raided the house of the first defendant on March 23, 1990 and seized those gold ornaments which weighed 2128 gms. along with other assets. Plaintiff said that she filed a petition before B the Income Tax Officer for return of the ornaments but he refused. The plaintiff then issued a notice to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Orissa, defendant No. 7, who, it is alleged, assured her that justice would be done to her claim and had stated that her case would be disposed of within three months. Nothing happened in spite of the reminders and no decision was C taken. This gave cause of action to the plaintiff. She served a notice under Section 80 of Code of Civil Procedure on Defendants 6 and 7 and thereafter filed the suit. From the facts, it is quite obvious that the plaintiff would not have filed the suit for partition as there was no dispute to her claim by other relatives D but for the fact that gold ornaments were then in the custody of the Income Tax Department. Notices of the suit were served on Defendants 6 and 7. They filed an application in the Court on August 7, 1992 challenging the very maintainability of the suit in view of Section 293 of the Act. The Section is as under : E Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) 2Meniulwied CLosv(iipemmutth) B: 199/ Q)or 2MenoullGwwevipemmul(h) crov aher 29 wr HhdAlWoTMsHds oor 24.10.94 ond Caadlulet Fr2D HASTOUV 9)(HHH] F1.9,17. ot-oOl (hIbHI 6T(L Tour FHS TT, F.oil.crow. Frou, (ClFovail. agag) H)revor) commit L.AHACWTTHOT CW(PonmMul LL reorrsoOH GCwevipenmuf() ClewWiuouraHer. oro.Ce. lage, (NP) ord)DOr. Gwureu ClororaruiTe! WmMMb OB7.CKE.45u7 HSlWOTMSS AUpMSSTS HWW SSIUL LTTE. IhHLWSTM HAD 8 F TL MSSlooLTT HAWwWTET HH. o.Ll. urHour ou(mlorer outl Dpenenrur, YuGora¢gair wuommib sHOOFFAD Qonorhs ailen 2 wr HAlOSTMSSOY QBSCr_mrur 24, 199GS5SIWILL HTUMU oTHTHS O)HH CLH(Pommultomr HrSSoO OlFWH| (HsatleweD WITd|LWSOTM LF TT UsLD60)5 OWT OlFWIFMT]HA WTNMHADOT 2 HAATOU 2 M5) CFWHH. BDV AUMhUTMWHAH oMTHITLOOISTIT HTbSO CewH]HHS UTSLINAM amor updates cla, 293,6U UH BIT EFL_L_I1961(Q)H5orLil‘FL_L_LD-60T தைட GFWWLILIL_hlotorsred CO1FVUHSASDHV coraorm Cartsaons HgrAds 1b odlTHoO HoT, ourdiurse Clorshsod ff lspdlanrdslsaonag ordlgrLITSBLILY MlaOULD HITEO)FWIA] (HIS91 5]52607 HTHHDTSHIAIFSHIONM ClFWvTarTr LOMMILD QHFT OU(MHUOTET UAHIONN Dpomo(peomow 6 wmmib fag) Uspdourdgloorrs CFTSSUIUL DG (HHHOUT. GQ\bhs MipdbadloT Crosvipenmulltrorrsarroirraer. 1 Lommuw 2-UTAIUOL WwW MeTTUL FOaTHTTHEOT wMmMiw 3 Ombhs! 9 Utd ourdlgoMaTTLiL) FOSS SOT QpourrHer. ord, UTR BSATOUMTEV WHMID BoOLomMo»rolaae Ulmhs wae Qourt. BCH Frown, Upslourdigor 1 upHvHUTH! QY) Foor rouds| Wenervra] WMMIwW vor ar HBSrourvloareTOUT.1 LITLE, DHOUMmOLw FHigGuil(HUL WHMID oeotlsa oFLL HS oor UlMay 132 Qjor Sp CEFrHomor WMMIW UMN IpHO 29 LUMSSLIUL Lor WHOM Fv FHS Duos 29 t UL wWvCam GlerLUM iIpHovo OlFUWLILILL OT. BH5H FID BUTormidsoporw OMFUPA ord! Coro#igeonr. urd) Fors STUTT 1938 Q)ov YB)mmHsHoltHHS CHIHHSOV Qeutlroo 200 Cros FHS QuowrBiszaw FHOUOTH Y)(HHDou ASMWOUT 5] (Lictt FH LOmM(F LPO HH O9]UIT ot LaMSMT UTS Foner CSTMAMA LOMMILW AlHwWoerth CHoMuUBeOFWOURNATSMa sTFFIT |19 LILIGH HISDh LIT OTLIN FFAS STOTOHWOLIG 2 uilev oTpH) CarHHS(HHSTIT. OHS BuTOOrm10, 1990 OQ) Q9)mbs ardiulor Bho swiloor HAroucded muUusSIULING Q)bS DuUTwmrmbisar (IpHoO ®GOMurolwresr uryore BMUASILIL Lo. HHWUD BuToOTrbibsmo#nws UMA (play OFWHHI. HULOM MUrdslourgs| 1 (LPH5 even 7 wilevm LDBOTHOV14 CGUSTILIVetoMaTHoT Q\(HHHOT. MUTAAGR I WHOTHOT Y)(HHHHATW114 UF DUTHORAGR 2 Momus). Bporred, UlMNoallnoragG (19909) Spor) wire 239,0 CHS! aps Ulgdlourasluilosr aftUTI OM)9515 Tiloேசாதைன hL_dS!,2128 So] IT6T6D)L_5 IBDf, LIT 600LOM MLommO)FTHHIAAOM MOALILIMM orriHUT OC BAMOMA H(HULING H(HOTM) o(HWOror unAdioOM BdlSrrlwltCFWDHATHYD Qpoorred HUT OMIFSHIONLLEDGTHYWO Td OHMoaNSHTIT. ouLitdlounrd| cores. /, satan ou(hioresr oul Qpenevrwi(HAG OHUT HOH CSMMAMSAAH HH! UMBISUILIHW croorm) 2 MidlwerlesDOU AOULD CLP LOTHBIBOHASy IT BLIL6TooFo) oor HENS APL Lo UJLD GTHIOYJLO HL HADOUlVEHMEV, 6THA (LPLE OW Urdslourdslaor WH BL UuUGHOD THAD HAMTOMMITH BDOOOHSHI. QuUbdlonrdgiaan wa 2 Menwwluced Henr_(iwponsF sLL_Ssdior SVs)CHrL_leow SX oy/LIL) Uloororr uipsagq D NTEMOWAM OO (HHA, USA Ulm 2 Mallorrarred VHass CaThA FTFOMOFUILD Q)ovenod. Opole HI BDpluPoOorbisr ou(HTOUO EV Y)ovevi4rLWev (9) (HHA (HHHATOO LIMON onorshsTST ULTL_tLinr croxoTuds! Ogomourad OaMalMSs!. aypasalor GHrtwewseLommitb / 5H pHs Lor, QourHaer SHovL_ 7, 1992 gS oorm FL_L293 Q)ar UTTenoiuied uiIpHAleor ClFEAILD HOTEMNSMOU FOTO C62(h Merrerworliui5oOs STS OlFWHoorr. ltloay "293. உாிைமயிM1நதீிம60Bகளி6WMP b பதியதைட - DggF| FL_L_GBIOO BLP THWSSULILL THhHEOOUT(G BLUgAOLOUML/LD YUTHIoFulusCaHUVVULTD UCMLISSCOUTBSOUT(Ro PieninupIBBNDOTDAB/QIID UPS AH OGTLILILILLWT LMT). CLV YHICOFT HUUWIFITNS YRATHOCOUTQF FLLGZIO BLY 1WBAD THE Qh /bOVO)VEWIT THWDRD YHUVUGZ) THHS 2GCOGHSGD BLUQAODLSA AD TEIITS THFBLU HOOBOLT, MPhLODTYUU) CUM! THF BL UL AOOBULD TWBH (L Case: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBANESHWAR AND ANR. versus PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA AND ORS. [[1998] 2 S.C.R. 253] (1998) TATERE ERI Gad aa V wig fare wet Peer we en, fare ge wea S Pe et omySe GATarene fury Ot after H oy 1 are ob ifew ward 6 sie 7 at anita Peay| oe 7ae,1992 I “Urea 4 um odes fear fret afoPrad at ar 203 at sf S ale H aere UA ST AMice fen Ta a Lae aT ga WER eS|."3’ fog ag“203. fort omer feftet sume at srarer # art at wach on ava aet — ga & ofa} fore feet Pit ona vara at we PoetF ars onda ae et aAVIET TT WON U Ror & fot ater 3 flee as afte, ae a oraoriarel feet tet ara & fry ze St war ot gw afdfiay & anita wenrangin wt ag: 2a at art ame& 1" 7}._— a —4. ea 4 ft ae gery ort the at a 2, afer BW ant 132 % anit ware AP _ 132 Gt TET (1) @ ait Meee, sree (Gis) Bexar’aRi ont for ae weS oni Test:Rater ae wae-Peee on, fey ay| ois de # agora sit owed ae rent ora Sa a aecenaoral at vt sore et 1g| went @ Yt arf 23 ard, 19908 26 AR 1990aw fee Ae | gastarreda Taal, Seay ENT A aS ery, wid S fad oilk fofeerat ayay aie afterta Pay ACI® Gt arr 132 at STENT (4) & onis, aTEeTt ar wey aferRea wa| are othe Sea aX H agere 7 7,00,000 ¥. at ate ar Barer ort etter fea ot wad ouwt 515 drat at | : : OEY Sad, YAR a. Tee St gear [ena] oSa ort orax Raw 4 vad sik wad gee S wer a yee fer awd, ateAMTHl Aer s| GAT Ta anysot H ac4 onrofed Maw PH as 350,000 & at afiRadwer at WW sik gat a wor oo as Sa Naas| oraS che aga Avant At fey| kat omysot @ Wee F srg weer wer ae on fe 2128 A eM S VE aTaftr edt & s ot Sad flat at yea ooh oft six Gaal sergewaar fla aat at sie S ot GadSt Seat we oe VUE a Yt et cet wad fir S Pitas S wee wed eA aeWort Gt sie Y SF Val wr after a| vaat celta we oft fe J vax vas fla j ore wW ev aTI aa vied ae S| IT I HMGS aa, sae aftaret + aforaq Ht art 132(5) s ania56,95,079 ©. gal & fired fay ved aftqeta onftrat wr Aer 20,49,694 & 2| aa: BWA UEWt afer @, fart 4+ ofeena ot ong] arse aftert + agen & ga wert wy afaearadu fade oA Gt ger aad GH ot vad We at qua it Sos st lagna dagStor STI fey fr sad flat at aftran ¥ 1938Y 1990 dH, wa BUT ay eS | afdhraAwl IRI 132 a Urea (5) & aell.snes ane wena anferal-s aR A ordafeai aflraay at arr& wade S orpaR st ari g|,| 432 Maa a5, afaraw anat ata forat 132 ot a Met sae F(6)| BATT aria 132 wRa anes S ET APT al saat or oh wae HS) (41) oh Perqaioe 4)wited aftert cart a after & ager & eh fat ta aise temawien ot wer firad wat a Pra } aie ae der ged, cen, os, earaid,SYST UT IT aM ag aT dot ag andl s sik Wi wai S ckWi afes arr fegafood pert or aaawits sree afefray, 1922 (1922 wt 11) & aria ga aaa asarity feet ariardt 4H wee A soar far or waa|.; me aia— wanit ot a oe & fy, ve diita fea ore § H ga ooSanit fatcafe at Wat a baat Rit core S w