Bombay High Court
Gami Infotech Pvt Ltd vs The Initiating Officer Under The ... on 27 March, 2019
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sarang V. Kotwal
1. os wp 734-19.doc
R.M. AMBERKAR
(Private Secretary)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
WRIT PETITION NO. 734 OF 2019
Shree Gami Infotech Private Ltd .. Petitioner
Versus
The Initiating Officer under the Prohibition
of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988,
DCIT(Benami Prohibition), Unit-1, Mumbai
& Anr. .. Respondents
...................
Mr. Jehangir Mistri, Sr. Counsel a/w Mr. Madhur Agrawal i/by
Mandal Vaidya for the Petitioner
Mr. Anil Singh, ASG a/w Mr. Suresh Kumar and Ms. Geetika
Gandhi for the Respondent
...................
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &
SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 27, 2019.
P.C.:
1. The petitioner has challenged a show cause notice dated 31.12.2018 as also the provisional attachment order passed by the Initiating Officer under Prohibition of Benami Property Transaction Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") in exercise of powers under Section 24(3) of the said Act. By the said order of provisional attachment, the said Authority has attached the petitioner's on going project namely "Gami Reagan" situated at Navi Mumbai to the 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 28/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 29/03/2019 01:53:26 :::
1. os wp 734-19.doc extent of benami property and its proceeds amounting to Rs. 33,60,54,410/-. The petitioner's main contention is that the entire action is without jurisdiction. The petitioner's subsidiary contention is that in any case for securing benami property valued at Rs. 33,60,54,410/-, the said Authority has attached the entire project which causes great prejudice and damage to the petitioner. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed for quashing of the said orders. Pending the petition, the petitioner has prayed for stay to the operation of the said show cause notice and the provisional attachment order.
2. Learned ASG appearing for the respondents prayed for time for filing reply. He submitted that the petition is prematured and filed at a stage where the said Authority has issued a show cause notice. Even if the said Authority was to proceed further, by passing the order of attachment in terms of sub-section 4 of Section 24 of the said Act, further steps would have to be taken by the adjudicating Authority as envisaged under Sections 26 and 27 of the said Act.
2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 28/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 29/03/2019 01:53:26 :::
1. os wp 734-19.doc
3. Let the respondents file reply by the next date of hearing with a copy to the other side which may be served latest by 2.4.2019.
4. S.O to 4th April, 2019. Any order that the Initiating Officer under the said Act may pass hereinafter, shall be subject to this petition. The petitioner's contention regarding attachment of the entire project for the valuation of benami property being much smaller shall also be examined on the next date of hearing.
[ SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ] 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 28/03/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 29/03/2019 01:53:26 :::