Shrikrishnan P. Jindal Huf And Anr v. The Income Tax Officer Ward 16(2

((-1-)) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1568 OF 2007 Shrikrishnan P. Jindal HUF and anr.. Petitioner Versus The Income TAx Officer Ward 16(2) & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. R.A. Dada, Sr. Counsel with Mr. Jitendra Jain and Mr. Richamchand i/by DSK Legal for the Petitioner. Mr. Ashok Kotangale for Respondents. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED: AUGUST 06, 2007 J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: AUGUST 06, 2007 P.C.: P.C.: . Rule. Heard forthwith. . It is the case of the Petitioner No. 1 that they have applied to Respondent No. 1 for return of seized jewellery. On behalf of respondent No. 1 their learned counsel produced communication of 29.12.2006 addressed to petitioner NO. 1 setting out that the office has no authority to return the jewellery and to take up the matter with the Investigation Wing in this regard. . The case of the Petitioner No. 1 is that even if the list of inventory of seized jewellery and panchanama thereof is considered, the items are set ((-2-)) out as belonging to S.K.Jindal (HUF). The order which is pointed out to us has not decided the said controversy, at least no findings to that effect have been recorded. In the light of that, on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 the learned counsel makes a statement that they will give hearing to the Petitioners and thereafter pass appropriate orders according to law. . In the light of that order dated 29.12.2006 stands withdrawn. The Respondent No. 1 to hear Petitioner No. 1 and pass appropriate orders according to law within two weeks from 13.08.2007. The Petitioner No. 1 to appear before Respondent No. 1 on 13.08.2007 at 11.00 a.m. . Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)