Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions (Removal of Difficulties) Order 2018. Reference to Initiating Officer, representation by other parties
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE)
(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)
ORDER
New Delhi, the 9th October, 2018
INCOME-TAX
S.O.5194 (E).—Whereas, sub-section (1) of section 48 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act,1988 (45 of 1988)(hereafter referred to as the said Act) provides that a person preferring an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under said Act may either appear in person or take the assistance of an authorised representative of his choice to present his case before the Appellate Tribunal; sub-section (2) of section 48 of the said Act provides that the Central Government may authorise one or more of its officers to act as presenting officers on its behalf, and every person so authorised may present the case with respect to any appeal before the Appellate Tribunal; the Explanation to section 48 of the said Act defines the term “authorised representative” for the purposes of said section;
And, whereas, a difficulty has arisen in view of the fact that although, under sub-section (1) of section 48 of the said Act-
(i) the Initiating Officer, being a person preferring appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under the said Act, may either appear in person or take the assistance of an authorised representative, there is a need to remove the difficulty arising from the absence of specific reference of the Initiating Officer in sub-section (1) of section 48 of the said Act; and
(ii) provides for the representation before the Appellate Tribunal for the person preferring appeal, but does not provide for representation by the other parties to the proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal, there is a need to remove difficulty in respect of representation by the other parties to the proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 70 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby makes the following Order to remove the aforesaid difficulties, namely:-
1. Short title and commencement.– (1) This Order may be called the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2018.
(2) It shall come into force from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In section 48 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, –
(A) in sub-section (1), for the words “A person preferring an appeal to”, the words “A person, including the Initiating Officer, who is a party to any proceedings before” shall be substituted;
(B) in the Explanation, –
(I) in the opening portion, for the words “means a person authorised by the appellant” the following shall be substituted, namely: – “in relation to –
(i) the Initiating Officer, means a person authorised by the Central Government;
(ii) any other party to the proceedings, means a person authorised by the party”;
(II) in clause (i) and (ii) for the words, “the appellant” wherever they occur, the words “the party” shall be substituted.
[F. No.370149/170/2018-TPL]
PRAVIN RAWAL, Director (TPL-II)
Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…
The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…
One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…
Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…
In GST Notice u/s 74, allegations should emanate from itself, a bland statement of ‘fraud or concealment of facts” not…
For claiming deduction u/s 57(iii) a reasonable and intelligible nexus should be established between the expenditure incurred and the income…