Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (8) TMI 383

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... perly joined or add the name of any person whose presence before the adjudicating authority may be necessary to enable him to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the reference. In this view, the principles of natural justice are codified in terms of Subsection (6) of Section 26 of the Act.The impugned order is subject to judicial review before the adjudicating authority. The order passed by the adjudicating authority can be assailed before the appellate tribunal constituted under Section 31 of the Act. The order of appellate tribunal can also be called in question by preferring appeal to the High Court within a period of 60 days. A microscopic reading of provisions make it clear that principles of natural justice are .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by adjudicating authority under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as the PBPT Act ). 2. Mr. Pratyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Initiating Officer under the PBPT Act issued show cause notice to the petitioner under Section 24(1) of the said Act. In reply to this notice dated 31.03.2017 (Annexure-P/5), the petitioner filed his reply on 07.04.2016 (Annexure-P/6). The petitioner also received summons issued under Section 19 (1) of the said Act (Page No.17). The petitioner appeared before the authority and desired certain documents. The petitioner also filed an affidavit before the Initiating Officer. The Initiating Officer passed the impugned order dated 29.06.2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ned counsel for the parties. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. 6. The show cause notice shows that it is passed on the basis of certain information received by the Initiating Officer. The Initiating Officer has not placed reliance on any documentary evidence. The petitioner demanded certain documents. Since, no document is relied upon in the show cause notice, the documents were not supplied to the petitioner. The order dated 29.06.2017 is a provisional attachment order under Section 24(4) of the PBPT Act, 1988. The order itself shows that it is issued with the prior approval of approving authority, but will remain subject to passing of necessary order by the adjudicating authority. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ne the stand of alleged Benamindar in reply to the show cause notice. He is further obliged to make further inquiry or take into account further report or evidence which he deems fit for deciding the question. He can take into account all relevant documents. After providing due opportunity of hearing to alleged Benamindar, he may pass the order to declare the property as Benami Property and confirm the attachment order or he may hold that the property cannot be treated as Benami Property . In that case, he may revoke the attachment order. Pertinently, as per Sub-section (6) of Section 26, the adjudicating authority may at any stage of proceeding, either on the application of any party or suo-moto strike out the name of any property improper .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed is provisional/tentative in nature. It is subject to judicial review by adjudicating authority. If order of adjudicating authority goes against the petitioner, the further forums of judicial review of said order is available to the petitioner before the appellate tribunal and then before this Court. Hence,against the tentative/provisional order, no interference is warranted by this court at this stage. As per the scheme of the Act, the petitioner can raise all possible grounds before the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority is best suited and statutorily obliged to consider all relevant aspects. Thus, at this stage no case is made out for interference. Moreso, when adjudicating authority has already fixed the hearing on 23. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates