Madras HC bins appeals by VK Sasikala's benamidars I-T actions on illegal transactions
The batch of appeals was filed by alleged benamidars, including VSJ Dinakaran, an owner of Spectrum Mall in Perambur, and K Nagarajan of Bonjour Bonheur Private Limited in Puducherry.
Published: 12th July 2022 02:51 AM | Last Updated: 12th July 2022 02:51 AM | A+A A-
CHENNAI: A division bench of the Madras High Court has dismissed writ appeals filed by benamidars of VK Sasikala challenging the order of a single judge over the proceedings of the Income Tax (I-T) department on illegal transactions using demonetised currency.
The batch of appeals was filed by alleged benamidars, including VSJ Dinakaran, an owner of Spectrum Mall in Perambur, and K Nagarajan of Bonjour Bonheur Private Limited in Puducherry. They prayed for setting aside the orders of Justice Anita Sumanth, passed on October 25, 2021, who junked their writ petitions.
The division bench consisting of justices R Mahadevan and J Sathya Narayana Prasad, in its recent orders, said we believe that in the absence of any provision of law as well as the compelling circumstances warranting the respondent authorities to provide an opportunity of cross-examination of witnesses, whose statements have been relied on by the respondent authorities to the appellant at the stage of section 24 proceedings, the plea raised by the appellant in this regard cannot be countenanced.
Therefore, we do not find any error in the order passed by the first respondent (Deputy Commissioner of IT), as an interim measure, continuing the provisional attachment order of the property till the passing of the order under section 26(3) by the adjudicating authority, the bench said.
It further stated the single judge has also rightly affirmed the same and directed the respondent authorities to proceed further in accordance with the law. Thus, the appellant has not made out any case to interfere with the order impugned herein as well as the impugned order of the I-T department. The contentions raised on the side of the appellant on the merits of the case are left open for adjudication before the authority concerned, the bench said in the order.