https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313115 Calcutta HC dismissed a writ petition challenging benami transaction proceedings under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988. The company argued the Act was inapplicable and that the Initiating Officer lacked jurisdiction, claiming only Section 68 of Income Tax Act applied. The court held the IO properly applied his mind to collected facts and the matter required factual adjudication by the Adjudicating Authority. The court rejected arguments regarding retrospectivity of 2016 Amendment Act's penal provisions, noting the Act's prospective operation and procedural nature of challenged steps. No jurisdictional violation was found. en-us Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:05:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313115 Calcutta HC dismissed a writ petition challenging benami transaction proceedings under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988. The company argued the Act was inapplicable and that the Initiating Officer lacked jurisdiction, claiming only Section 68 of Income Tax Act applied. The court held the IO properly applied his mind to collected facts and the matter required factual adjudication by the Adjudicating Authority. The court rejected arguments regarding retrospectivity of 2016 Amendment Act's penal provisions, noting the Act's prospective operation and procedural nature of challenged steps. No jurisdictional violation was found. Case-Laws Benami Property Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313115