Pradeep Kothari and Lata Kothari and Deep Kothari and Shikha Kothari and Vivek Singhvi and Jaya Singhvi and Gurudev Shanti Vijay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. and Ramlal Ninama V. Union Of India and Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Benami Prohibition)

CW/15605/2019

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Pradeep Kothari and others against the Union of India and the Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax concerning the applicability of the Benami Amendment Act 2016. The petitioners sought clarity on whether the amendments made by the Benami Amendment Act 2016 would apply retrospectively. The court referenced a similar case, Niharika Jain & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., where it was held that the amendments are prospective. The court did not re-examine the merits of the individual cases but applied the established legal precedent to dispose of the current petition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 802864 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Niharika Jain & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
• Laws Referred To: Prohibition Of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, Benami Amendment Act 2016
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: NIKHIL SIMLOTE
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDHARTH RANKA
• Keywords: Benami property; Retrospective Applicability; Writ Petition Disposed
• Section: 93; 95; 94

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15605/2019 1. Pradeep Kothari, Son Of Shri Mahendra Kothari, Resident Of Kothari Haveli, Banswara In The State Of Rajasthan 2. Lata Kothari, Wife Of Smt. Pradeep Kothari, Resident Of Kothari Haveli, Banswara In The State Of Rajasthan 3. Deep Kothari, Son Of Shri Pradeep Kothari, Resident Of Kothari Haveli, Banswara In The State Of Rajasthan 4. Shikha Kothari, Wife Of Shri Deep Kothari, Resident Of Kothari Haveli, Banswara In The State Of Rajasthan 5. Vivek Singhvi, Son Of Shri Rajendra Singhvi, Resident Of 464-A, Talwandi, Kota In The State Of Rajasthan 6. Jaya Singhvi, Wife Of Shri Vivek Singhvi, Resident Of 464- A, Talwandi, Kota In The State Of Rajasthan 7. Gurudev Shanti Vijay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Registered Address At Room No. 3, 1St Floor, Kothari Haweli, Mahalaxmi Chowk, Banswara In The State Of Rajasthan 8. Ramlal Ninama, Son Of Shri Vagji, Resident Of Iti Ke Peechhe, Bari Daylab, Kothari Haveli, Banswara In The State Of Rajasthan ----Petitioners Versus 1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance (Department Of Revenue), North Block, New Delhi 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Benami Prohibition) And Initiating Officer, Under The Prohibition Of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Bhagwan Das Road, C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nikhil Simlote Adv. (2 of 3) [CW-15605/2019] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR Order 03/10/2019 Counsel for the parties informed this Court that the controversy involved in the instant writ petition is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2915/2019 (Niharika Jain & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.) & other connected petition decided by common order dt. 12th July, 2019. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in para Nos. 93, 94 & 95 of the judgment in the case of Niharika Jain & Ors. (supra) has held as under:- “93. For the reason aforesaid and in the backdrop of the settled legal proposition so also in view of singular factual matrix of the matters herein; this Court has no hesitation to hold that the Benami Amendment Act 2016, amending the Principal Benami Act 1988, enacted w.e.f. 1st November, 2016, i.e. the date determined by the Central Government in its wisdom for its enforcement; cannot have retrospective effect. 94. It is made clear that this Court has neither examined nor commented upon merits of the writ applications but has considered only the larger question of retrospective applicability of the Benami Amendment Act, 2016 amending the original Benami Act of 1988. Thus, the authority concerned would examine each case on its own merits keeping in view the fact that amended provisions introduced and the amendments enacted and made enforceable w.e.f. 1st November, 2016; would be prospective and not retrospective. 95. The batch of the writ applications stands disposed off, as indicated above.” This Court, considering the nature of the controversy, which has already been decided, deems it proper to dispose of the (3 of 3) [CW-15605/2019] present writ petition as per the terms, which have been given in the case of Niharika Jain & Ors. (supra). The judgment in the case of Niharika Jain & Ors. (supra) will apply on all four corners to the present controversy. It goes without saying that if any order is passed by the Division Bench in the appeal preferred by the Revenue, the parties would be bound by the same. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J Monika/123 "