Case Law Details
Rajesh Katyal Vs Income Tax Department (Delhi High Court)
Supreme Court in judgment of Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Held that offence under Section 53 of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is prospective and would only apply to those transactions which were entered into after amendment came into force i.e., 01st November, 2016. Supreme has categorically held that the Act of 2016 which contains the criminal provisions is applicable only prospectively and quashed the prosecution proceedings.
It is admitted in the present case that the alleged benami transactions undertaken by the Petitioner were entered prior to 01st November 2016. In light of the law as declared by the Supreme Court in Ganapati Dealcom the present writ petition is allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction for quashing and to set aside the Show Cause Notice dated 04th April, 2022 (‘SCN’) issued by the Respondent under Section 53 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, as amended by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 (the ‘Act of 2016’), which came into effect on 01st November 2016, against the Petitioner.
Please become a member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
