2023 (1) TMI 1335

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o challenge the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 26(3) and 24(6) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 ('PBPT Act') as amended by the Act of 2016. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Initiating Officer of the Benami Prohibition Unit (BPU) had initiated the proceedings after applying the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 (in short 'Amendment Act 2016'). The alleged benami transaction involved in this case is of the period prior to amendment. The issue of the application of the Amendment Act of 2016 in regard to the Benami Transaction prior to the amendment was an issue before the Apex Court and has been decided in the case of "Union of India & Anr. v/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourt in the case supra, liberty be given to the Department to take the appropriate remedies in case of review of the judgment by the Apex Court. It may include a review petition before this Tribunal. It is further submitted that independent to the action involved in this case, if the Department has a right to initiate proceedings after taking Amendment Act of 2016 to be prospective, liberty for it be given. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the records. A challenge to the order of the Adjudicating Authority has been made by way of this appeal mainly with reference to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of "Union of India & Anr. v/s M/s. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd." (supra). On perusal of the o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the constitutionality of such independent forfeiture proceedings contemplated under the 2016 Amendment Act on the other grounds, the aforesaid questions are left open to be adjudicated in appropriate proceedings". In the light of the facts available on record, we find that the appeal is covered by the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of "Union of India & Anr. v/s M/s. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd." (supra). Therefore, the order of the Adjudicating Authority confirming the action of Initiating Officer needs to be interfered and accordingly the impugned order and the proceedings initiated by the respondent in reference to the alleged benami transaction of a period prior to the Amendment Act of 2016 are set aside. The appeal is allo....