Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ, GAUTAM A. ANKHAD
Initiating Officer, and Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Benami Prohibition) – Appellant
Versus
Rahul V. Takalkar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case initiated under benami act (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. impact of supreme court's review on prior decisions (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. liberty to file review petition granted (Para 5) |
| 4. appeal dismissed, merits left open (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT :
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, C.J
The appellant-Department through its Initiating Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Benami Prohibition) has challenged the order dated 19th April 2023 under section 46 of the Prohibition of Benami Properties Transactions Act, 1988 (in short, “Benami Act”) passed by the Appellate Tribunal under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (in short, “the Appellate Tribunal”).
2. The short facts of this case are that an order of provisional attachment under section 24(4)(a)(i) of the Benami Act was passed on 24th November 2017 against the respondents directing that the attachment shall continue until an order under section 26(3) of the Act is passed by the adjudicating Authority. The adjudicating Authority confirmed the provisional attachment by an order dated 31st December 2018. Aggrieved by the confirmation order, the respondents preferred appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
The court upheld the Appellate Tribunal's decision allowing legal remedies pending Supreme Court review, emphasizing the importance of the Amendment Act's prospective application and leaving merits f....
The court held that the appellant's appeal could not be assessed on merits pending the Supreme Court's decision and prior liberty granted to file for review remained valid.
The court emphasized that liberty granted to file a review petition must be recognized, pending the Supreme Court's ruling on a prior case affecting the application of the Amendment Act, 2016.
The appellant-Department retains the right to file review petitions based on outcomes of related Supreme Court proceedings, emphasizing that the merits of the appeal remain unexamined.
The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 prescribes substantive provisions and has a prospective effect, and concerned authorities cannot initiate or continue criminal prosecution or....
The court established that review jurisdiction is not an avenue for re-evaluating evidence or arguments previously considered, and that a review can only be granted in cases of clear errors or new ev....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
