SMT. KALI DEVI W/O. SHRI KALYAN SAHAI MEENA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/18931/2023HC RajasthanRJHC02096126202320 February 2024Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,SHUBHA MEHTA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court acknowledged the delay in releasing the attached properties, which have been under attachment since 2021, and that the reference was decided in favor of the petitioners. While not deciding the merits of the release applications, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the official respondents of the Income Tax Department to consider and decide the applications (Annexures 4, 5, and 6) within two weeks from the date of the order. The petitioners are directed to appear before the respondents on February 26, 2024, at 11 A.M. The respondents are to decide the matter in accordance with law and expeditiously. No specific finding was given on the legal question of release, as the matter was disposed of with a direction to decide the pending applications.

What were the facts?

The petitioners, Smt. Kali Devi and Rajendra Mandia, purchased agricultural land in 2015-2016. Proceedings under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 were initiated against them in 2019, leading to the provisional attachment of their properties on March 26, 2021. The petitioners contend that the transactions predate October 25, 2016. Despite the reference not being allowed in favor of the revenue, the properties have not been released. The petitioners are aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in dealing with their applications for the release of properties, even after the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Ors. versus Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. dated August 23, 2022.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the respondents are obligated to release the attached properties of the petitioners, considering the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Ors. versus Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. (2022) and the fact that the reference was not decided in favor of the revenue? Assessee's Contention: The petitioners argue that their applications for the release of properties have not been addressed by the respondents. They rely on the Supreme Court's decision in Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. and a coordinate bench's order in D.B.C.W.P. No. 15051/2023, which directed the release of properties in similar circumstances. They also highlight that the transactions are prior to October 25, 2016. Revenue's Contention: The respondents state that a review petition is pending before the Supreme Court, and the delay has been condoned.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[2024:RJ-JP:8626-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18931/2023 1. Smt. Kali Devi W/o. Shri Kalyan Sahai Meena, Resident Of Village Dhand, Tehsil Amer District Jaipur (Raj.). 2. Rajendra Mandia S/o. Shri Kalyan Sahai Meena, Resident Of Village Dhand, Tehsil Amer District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Petitioners Versus 1. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Benami Prohibition Unit, Jaipur Ncr Building Statue Circle, C- Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Benami Prohibition Unit, Jaipur Ncr Building Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan). 3. Tehsildar, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Daga For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 20/02/2024 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (Oral):- 1. This petition is filed seeking directions to the respondents to release the properties from attachment. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioners purchased agricultural land in the year 2015-2016. In 2019, proceedings under Prohibitiion of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 were initiated against the petitioners. On 26.03.2021, the properties were provisionally attached. The reference made was not allowed, yet the properties were not released. It is pleaded that the transactions are prior to 25.10.2016. (Uploaded on 27/02/2024 at 10:33:53 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:43:51 AM)

[2024:RJ-JP:8626-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-18931/2023] 3. The grievance raised is that in spite of the decision of the Supreme Court dated 23.08.2022 in Civil Appeal No.5783/ 2022 titled as Union of India & Ors. versus Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. 447 ITR 108 / 289 Taxman 177 (SC), the applications filed for release of the properties have not been dealt with. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar circumstances, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.01.2024 passed in D.B.C.W.P. No. 15051/2023 has ordered for release of the properties. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents appearing on advance notice submits that the review is pending before the Supreme Court and the delay stands condoned. 6. In order to avoid any further delay and considering that the properties have been attached since 2021 and the reference was decided in favour of the petitioners, the petition at this stage is disposed of with the directions to the arrayed official respondents of the Income Tax Department to consider and decide the applications Annexure 4, 5 and 6 (annexed with the petition) within two weeks from today. 7. The petitioners shall appear in the office of the respondents on 26.02.2024 at 11 A.M. The respondents shall decide the matter in accordance with law, expeditiously. (SHUBHA MEHTA),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Chandan/Himanshu/1 Whether Reportable: Yes : No Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) (Uploaded on 27/02/2024 at 10:33:53 AM) (Downloaded on 30/10/2026 at 09:43:51 AM)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →