SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
VEERENDRA SINGH SIRADHANA
DR. RAM SINGH YADAV @ RAMU RAM @ RAMU YADAV S/O LATE SH. BRAJ LAL ALIAS VIRDHI CHAND YADAV, – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Order

12 th July, 2019 The above noted batch of writ applications, projects a challenge to the jurisdiction of the income tax authorities in initiation of proceedings under section 24 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (for short, Benami Act of 1988), as amended vide Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 (for short, Benami Amendment Act of

2016), which came into effect on 01st November, 2016. Hence, the matters have been entertained collectively for final adjudication at this stage by this common order consented by the counsel for the parties.

2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the essential skeletal material facts needs to be taken note of for adjudication of the controversy are: that the Income Tax Department conducted search and seizure under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on various premises belonging to the petitioners and in course of search and seizure, several incriminating documents were found, indicating several benami transactions in purchase of lands involved herein. Accordingly, show cause notices were issued under section 24 (1) of the amended Benami Act of 1988, to show cause why action should not be taken against them

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top