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

2022 (9) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (8) TMI 1047 - SUPREME COURT] that authorities cannot initiate or continue criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings for transactions entered into prior to the coming into force of the 2016 Act, viz., 25.10.2016 and as a consequence thereof, all such prosecutions and confiscation proceedings which had been initiated came to be quashed. We are of the considered view prosecution and initiation of proceedings in the instant case being pursuant to the Amendment Act the declaration made by the Hon ble Apex Court in paragraph 18(e) would squarely be applicable and as such, impugned attachment order stands quashed and all consequential proceedings initiated thereto. We also make it clear that question which has been kept open by the Hon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... etitioner(s) No. 1 MS. JIGNA J SHAH(7004) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR M.R. BHATT, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR M R BHATT CO.(5953) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DEVANG VYAS, ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA for the Respondent(s) No. 2, 3 ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR ) 1. We have heard Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of Ms. Nupur D. Shah for the petitioner, Mr. M.R. Bhatt, learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent No.1 namely the Initiating Officer as defined under Section 2(19) read with Sections 18(1), 24 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (for short the Act ) and Mr. Devang Vyas, learned Additional Sol .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion 5 of the unamended Act of 1988, prior to the 2016 Amendment Act, was unconstitutional for being manifestly arbitrary. c) The 2016 Amendment Act was not merely procedural, rather, prescribed substantive provisions. d) In rem forfeiture provision under Section 5 of the 2016 Act, being punitive in nature, can only be applied prospectively and not retroactively. e) Concerned authorities cannot initiate or continue criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings for transactions entered into prior to the coming into force of the 2016 Act, viz., 25.10.2016. As a consequence of the above declaration, all such prosecutions or confiscation proceedings shall stand quashed. f) As this Court is not concerned with the const .....

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