(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2601 OF 2007 Shrikrishan P. Jindal HUF & Anr...Petitioners Vs. The Income Tax Officer & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. J.D. Mistry with Mr. Jitendra Jain and Ricat Chand i/b.D.S.K. Legal for the petitioners Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the Respondent. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE,JJ. R.S.MOHITE,JJ. R.S.MOHITE,JJ. DATED: 29TH JANUARY,2008 DATED: 29TH JANUARY,2008 DATED: 29TH JANUARY,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. A search was carried out in the premises of Petitioner No.2. In the course of the search a locker belonging to petitioner No.1 was also searched and from there various items were seized. Most of the items seized have been released except 3 items which are as described at page 45 of this petition. They are described as:- 1. Ring 2. Tops 3. Necklace It is the case of the petitioner No.2 that these (-2-) have been returned in the Wealth Tax returned of Petitioner No.1 and they have been so accepted for the last several years. 3. On the other hand on behalf of the Respondents their learned Counsel submits that there are apparent discrepancies and in these circumstances the said items of jewellery have been taken in possession and is subject to the proceedings under the Act. 4. Various contentions were raised as to the power to decide the applications for release of the gold ornaments. After hearing the parties in our opinion the issue can be disposed of by issuing the following directions to Respondent No.4 and Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I, Mumbai:- (i) The Items 1 and 2 at page 45 be released without any security, but will be subject to any order that may be passed. The petitioners to file an undertaking that they will not dispose of the two items during the pendency of the proceedings and if the order be adverse for a period of four weeks from the order of block assessment in the hands of Petitioner No.2. (ii) In so far as item No.3 is concerned, the (-3-) petitioner No.1 to furnish a bank guarantee in the sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs in favour of C.I.T. Central I, who on furnishing such guarantee shall release the Necklace in favour of the petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.1 to keep the bank guarantee alive for a period of four weeks from the order of block assessment of petitioner No.2. (iii) Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)