IT department gets tough, attaches benami property worth Rs 43 billion
In a major crackdown, the Income Tax department has attached over 1,500 unaccounted properties across the country. The value is estimated at Rs 43 billion. The action comes within a year of the revised benami legislation.
A report in the Business Standard said that Jaipur and Mumbai topped the list of attachments with around 200 properties each.
Patna
with
30
saw
the
least
number
of
attachments,
which
was
followed
by
Lucknow
at
50.
At
Kolkata,
Chandigarh,
and
Hyderabad,
144,
110,
and
100
properties
were
attached.
Most
of
the
properties
that
were
attached
belonged
to
gold
dealers,
bankers,
hawala
operators,
senior
government
officials
and
politicians,
the
report
while
citing
officials
said.
Interestingly in a case reported from Jabalpur, a driver who was found to be the benamidar owned land worth Rs 77 million. The owner is the employer of the driver, which is a Madhya based listed company.
What is the Benami Property Act
The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act came into force on November 1 2017. This act would have only a post-facto effect which means it would be after the benami transaction has taken place.
The bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on May 13, 2015 to amend the Benami Transactions Act of 1988. While the act provides for preventing and confiscating benami properties, the bill sought to amend the definition of benami transactions, (establish adjudicating authorities and an Appellate Tribunal to deal with benami transactions, and specify the penalty for entering into benami transactions.
The Act defines a benami transaction as a transaction where a property is held by or transferred to a person, but has been provided for or paid by another person. The Bill amends this definition to add other transactions which qualify as benami, such as property transactions where:
(i)
the
transaction
is
made
in
a
fictitious
name,
(ii)
the
owner
is
not
aware
of
denies
knowledge
of
the
ownership
of
the
property,
or
(iii)
the
person
providing
the
consideration
for
the
property
is
not
traceable.