MADAN SINGH S/O SHRI DEVI SINGH RAJPUT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX (BENAMI TRANSACTION)

PDF · subscribers
CW/1822/2020HC RajasthanRJHC02005113202021 August 2024Author: PANKAJ BHANDARI,PRAVEER BHATNAGAR2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and deemed it proper to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Court noted that the issue of limitation for filing an appeal can be addressed by filing an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay. The aggrieved person can satisfy the Appellate Authority that they were prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. The petitioner is permitted to file an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay and to raise all possible legal grounds for not preferring the appeal within the stipulated time. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Madan Singh, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, challenging an order dated 26.08.2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 71 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988. This order was in relation to a reference passed under Section 26(3) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016. The petitioner contended that the Appellate Tribunal was not functional at the time of filing the writ petition on 16.01.2020. Subsequently, a Chairman for the Appellate Tribunal was appointed. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition and file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the writ petition and file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, given that the Tribunal was non-functional at the time of filing the writ petition? (Question of procedure and access to justice) Contentions: Assessee (Petitioner): The writ petition was filed due to the non-functional status of the Appellate Tribunal. Now that a Chairman has been appointed, the petitioner wishes to pursue the appellate remedy. The petitioner seeks liberty to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, including an application for condonation of delay. Revenue (Respondents): No specific contentions recorded for the revenue regarding the disposal of the writ petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 71,Section 26(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[2024:RJ-JP:35176-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1822/2020 Madan Singh S/o Shri Devi Singh Rajput, Village- Ganwadi, Tehsil- Didwana, District-Nagaur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Deputy Commissioner, Income Tax (Benami Transaction), And Initiating Officer Under The Prevention Of Benami Transaction Act 2016, Room No. 2500, Statue Circle, Ncrb, Income Tax Office, Jaipur 2. Union Of India, Through Its Secretary, Income Tax Department, Government Of India, New Delhi 3. Adjudicating Authority, Under The Prohibition Of Benami Property Transaction Act-1988, Room No.26, 4Th Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi- 110001 4. Shri Manjeet Singh S/o Shri Hukam Singh, R/o Village- Sanvarad, Tehsil-Ladnu, District-Nagaur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajendra Singh, Mr. Rajendra Prashad Sharma for Mr. Ajay Kumar Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna, Adv.with Mr. Mehyul Mittal, Mr. Sarvesh Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

Order 21/08/2024

1.

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 26.08.2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 71 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988 while deciding the

[2024:RJ-JP:35176-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-1822/2020] Reference No.1048/2018 passed under Section 26(3) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016. 2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the Appellate Tribunal was not functional and therefore, the writ petition was filed before the Court on 16.01.2020. Now, Chairman of the Appellate Tribunal has been appointed and the present writ petition may be disposed of and petitioner may be permitted to file the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.

3.

We have considered the contentions.

4.

We deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. This Court further finds that as far as the issue of limitation of filing an appeal within prescribed time is concerned, the aggrieved persons can always file an appeal along with the application for condoning the delay in filing appeal, after satisfying the Appellate Authority that persons aggrieved were prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

5.

Petitioner is permitted to file appropriate application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. It goes without saying that the petitioner would be at liberty to take all possible legal grounds for not preferring the appeal within the stipulated time.

6.

Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed with aforesaid liberty.

7.

All pending applications stand disposed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J CHANDAN /42

More judgments on Section 71

All 295 judgments and leading authorities on Section 71 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →