{"id":275637,"date":"2022-10-15T09:00:13","date_gmt":"2022-10-15T03:30:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=275637"},"modified":"2022-10-15T09:00:13","modified_gmt":"2022-10-15T03:30:13","slug":"delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

   <\/p>\n

Delhi High Court<\/b>: In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988<\/a> for attachment and confiscation of properties which were admittedly acquired prior to the enforcement of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016<\/a>, Yashwant Varma, J., quashed all proceedings as in compliance with a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Union of India<\/i> v. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.<\/i>, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1064<\/a>, wherein it was categorically held that concerned authorities cannot initiate or continue criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings for transactions entered into prior to the coming into force of the 2016 Act, viz., 25-10-2016 and thus, all such prosecutions or confiscation proceedings shall stand quashed.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court in Ganpati Dalcom<\/i> (supra) dealt with the issue of retrospective application of the provisions by virtue of the introduction of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016<\/a>. The Supreme Court ruled on the powers of attachment and confiscation in respect of properties acquired and in which interests stood, prior to the 2016 Amendment by stating that the stain of benami transactions is not restricted to the person who is entering into the aforesaid transaction, rather, it attaches itself to the property perpetually and extends itself to all proceeds arising from such a property, unless the defence of innocent ownership is established under Section 27(2) of the 2016 Act. When such a defect is being created not on the individual, but on the property itself, a retroactive law would characterize itself as punitive for condemning the proceeds of sale which may also involve legitimate means of addition of wealth.<\/p>\n

Looked at from a different angle, continuation of only the civil provisions under Section 4 of 1988 Act, etc., would mean that the legislative intention was to ensure that the ostensible owner would continue to have full ownership over the property, without allowing the real owner to interfere with the rights of benamidar. If that is the case, then without effective any enforcement proceedings for a long span of time, the rights that have crystallized since 1988, would be in jeopardy. Such implied intrusion into the right to property cannot be permitted to operate retroactively, as that would be unduly harsh and arbitrary.<\/p>\n

In light of the judgment on, the Court noted that it is evident that the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained. Thus, the Court quashed various summon notices issued to the petitioners in the present batch of petitions, along with show cause notices, provisional attachment order and all other impugned proceedings.<\/p>\n

[Reliance Commodities v. ACIT, WP (C) No. 3139 of 2019 and Satyendar Jain v. UOI, WP (C) No. 5158 of 2017, decided on 10-10-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

In WP (C) No. 3139 of 2019<\/p>\n

Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Mr. Ayush Puri, Mr. Tejaswini, Ms. Umang Tyagi, Mr. Prateek Kumar, Advocates, for the Petitioner;<\/p>\n

Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, CGSC with Ms. Srishti Rawat, Ms. Ritwik Sneha, Advocates, for the R-2;<\/p>\n

In W.P.(C) 5158\/2017<\/p>\n

Mr. Dayan Krisyhnan, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Vivek Jain, Mr. Vaibhav Yadav, Mr. Amit Anand and Ms. Devyani, Advocates, for the Petitioner;<\/p>\n

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Vipul Agarwal and Mr. Parth Semwal, Advocates for the Income Tax Department.<\/p>\n\n

*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Delhi High Court: In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":268833,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2736,29923,35786,2543,21664,52398,51404,2659,52399],"class_list":["post-275637","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Amendment","tag-benami-property","tag-confiscation","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-quashing","tag-reliance-commodities","tag-retroactive","tag-retrospective","tag-satyendar-jain"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-10-15T03:30:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-10-15T03:30:13+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 | SCC Times","description":"In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988","og_description":"In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-10-15T03:30:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/","name":"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg","datePublished":"2022-10-15T03:30:13+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"In a batch of petitions filed assailing proceedings initiated by the respondent- State under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/15\/delhi-high-court-quashes-confiscation-proceedings-against-satyender-jain-under-prohibition-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court quashes confiscation proceedings against Satyender Jain under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":272133,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/24\/section-3-and-5-of-benami-property-transactions-act-1988-unconstituional-stillborn-2016-amendment-act-does-not-apply-retroactively-prospective-application-supreme-court-legal-news-updates-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":275637,"position":0},"title":"Sections 3 and 5 of the 1988 Benami Property law “still-born” and “unconstitutional”; 2016 Amendment can only apply prospectively: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"August 24, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe continued presence of an unconstitutional law on the statute book, or the claim that such law was not challenged before Constitutional Courts, does not prevent this Court from holding that such unconstitutional laws cannot enure to the benefit of or be utilized to retroactively amend laws to cure\u00a0\u00a0 existing\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Sections-3-and-5-of-the-1988-Benami-Property-law-still-born-and-unconstitutional-2016-Amendment-can-only-apply-prospectively-Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Sections-3-and-5-of-the-1988-Benami-Property-law-still-born-and-unconstitutional-2016-Amendment-can-only-apply-prospectively-Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Sections-3-and-5-of-the-1988-Benami-Property-law-still-born-and-unconstitutional-2016-Amendment-can-only-apply-prospectively-Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Sections-3-and-5-of-the-1988-Benami-Property-law-still-born-and-unconstitutional-2016-Amendment-can-only-apply-prospectively-Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Sections-3-and-5-of-the-1988-Benami-Property-law-still-born-and-unconstitutional-2016-Amendment-can-only-apply-prospectively-Supreme-Court-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":259977,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/13\/benami-transactions\/","url_meta":{"origin":275637,"position":1},"title":"Benami Transactions: Meaning and Facets","author":"Editor","date":"January 13, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Ayush Pandey* and Shivendra Nath Mishra**","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-133.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-133.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-133.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-133.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-133.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":82791,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/10\/29\/the-benami-transactions-prohibition-amendment-act-2016-to-come-into-force-on-nov-1-2016\/","url_meta":{"origin":275637,"position":2},"title":"The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 to come into force on Nov. 1, 2016","author":"Saba","date":"October 29, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"The Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 has been amended by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 (BTP Amendment Act). The rules and all the provisions of the BTP Amendment Act shall come into force on 1st\u00a0November, 2016. After coming into effect of the BTP Amendment Act, the existing Benami\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Legislation Updates"","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":7204,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/05\/27\/benami-transactions-prohibition-amendment-bill-2015\/","url_meta":{"origin":275637,"position":3},"title":"Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Bill, 2015","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 27, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"On 13.05.2015, the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Bill, 2015 was introduced in Lok Sabha. The Bill seeks to amend the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (referred hereto as the principal Act) by introducing following amendments in the said Act: Inserts a new Chapter I before Section 1 of the principal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Legislation Updates"","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/parliamentSM.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/parliamentSM.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/parliamentSM.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/parliamentSM.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/parliamentSM.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/parliamentSM.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":242539,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/21\/retrospective-operation-of-the-benami-laws-the-confusion-remains\/","url_meta":{"origin":275637,"position":4},"title":"Retrospective Operation of the Benami Laws: The Confusion Remains","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 21, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Saurabh Seth\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/benami-law.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/benami-law.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/benami-law.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/benami-law.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/benami-law.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":316452,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/08\/applications-recovery-alleging-debtors-benami-companies-notified-person-onus-proof-lies-custodian-supreme-court-explains\/","url_meta":{"origin":275637,"position":5},"title":"For recovery alleging debtors of benami companies of notified person, onus of proof lies on Custodian: Supreme Court","author":"Ridhi","date":"March 8, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is only after the Custodian discharged this primary burden and established the existence of the debt, then by virtue of Section 102 of the Evidence Act, perhaps, the onus could be shifted on to the appellants to rebut the same.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Benami companies","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Benami-companies.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Benami-companies.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Benami-companies.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Benami-companies.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/275637","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=275637"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/275637\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/268833"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=275637"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=275637"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=275637"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}