black money judiciary-2

Coercive measures cannot be taken against taxpayer in case he challenges Black Money Act

Anila Rasiklal Mehta Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)

Since assessee had not disclosed any black money or asset in the income tax proceedings going against him rather he had denied the same, therefore, while respondents may proceed pursuant to the impugned notices dated December 20, 2017 to assessee under Section 10(1) of the Black Money Act calling upon them to produce the details sought fo...

Read More

Benami Law- Amended Provision of 2016 has no relevance without provisions of Act of 1988

Tulsiram Vs ACIT (Benami Prohibition) (Chhattisgarh High Court)

Tulsiram Vs ACIT (Benami Prohibition) (Chhattisgarh High Court) To decide the core issue whether the amended Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 can be made applicable for initiating proceedings against the petitioner in respect of the properties which were purchased or acquired prior to 01.11.2016, it would be necessary...

Read More

Adjudicating authority obliged to examine stand of alleged Benamindar: HC

Kailash Assudani Vs CIT (Madhya Pradesh High court)

Kailash Assudani Vs CIT (Madhya Pradesh High court) A plain reading of Sub-section (3) of Section 26 of Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988 makes it clear that the adjudicating authority is obliged to examine the stand of alleged Benamindar in reply to the show cause notice. He is further obliged to make further […...

Read More

Adjudicating Authority only can decide on Benami nature of property

Kailash Assudani Vs CIT (Madhya Pradesh High Court)

Kailash Assudani Vs CIT (Madhya Pradesh High Court) High Court held that It is the Adjudicating Authority who is to decide the question of Benami nature of the property. The proceedings under Section 24 of the Act contemplates the issuance of show cause notice as to why the property specified in the notice should not […]...

Read More

Statute cannot have any retrospectivity unless expressly provided therein

Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr. (Calcutta High Court)

Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr. (Calcutta High Court) By an amendment an existing Act is supplemented by new provisions adding to or subtracting from it. It is usual that parts of the existing Act are retained. Say for example, there is a provision in the existing Act for penalty in […]...

Read More

SC set aside Delhi HC order restraining I-T dept from taking action Gautam Khaitan

Union of India and Ors. Vs Gautam Khaitan (Supreme Court)

Union of India and Ors. Vs Gautam Khaitan (Supreme Court) Scheme of the Black Money Act is to provide stringent measures for curbing the menace of black money. Various offences have been defined and stringent punishments have also been provided. However, the scheme of the Black Money Act also provided one time opportunity to make [&hellip...

Read More

Landmark Judgment: Benami Amendment Act, 2016 not applicable from retrospective effect: HC

Niharika Jain W/o Shri Andesh Jain Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)

Court has no hesitation to hold that the Benami Amendment Act, 2016, amending the Principal Benami Act, 1988, enacted w.e.f. 1st November, 2016, i.e. the date determined by the Central Government in its wisdom for its enforcement; cannot have retrospective effect....

Read More

Onus to prove that transaction were benami rests on plaintiff: SC

Mangathai Ammal (Died) through LRs Vs Rajeswari & Others (Supreme Court of India)

Mangathai Ammal (Died) through LRs Vs Rajeswari & Others (Supreme Court) In the case of Jaydayal Poddar it is held that the burden of proving that a particular sale is benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be sold. In P. Leelavathi it is […]...

Read More

Delhi HC restrains I-T dept from taking action Gautam Khaitan

Gautam Khaitan Vs Union of India & Ors (Delhi High Court)

Government cannot exercise powers under Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, prior to statute itself coming into force....

Read More

After amendments Onus of proving a benami transaction rests entirely on owner/ benamidar

Shri Akashdeep Vs Manpreet Estates LLP (Appellate Tribunal For PBPT Act)

Shri Akashdeep Vs Manpreet Estates LLP (Appellate Tribunal For PBPT Act) It is correct that after amendment in Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (PBPT Act) , the onus of proving a benami transaction rests entirely on the shoulders of the respondents. Before amendment, the burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,680)
Company Law (5,954)
Custom Duty (7,737)
DGFT (4,218)
Excise Duty (4,361)
Fema / RBI (4,181)
Finance (4,380)
Income Tax (32,986)
SEBI (3,450)
Service Tax (3,553)

Search Posts by Date

May 2020
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031