The AT dismissed the appeal, holding the transactions to be...

The AT dismissed the appeal, holding the transactions to be benami. The Tribunal found that the Appellant effected indirect investment through a benamidar and family to acquire tribal lands, rather than extending a genuine loan: the benamidar disclaimed knowledge, his bank account was operated by the Appellant, no loan agreement, security or repayment capacity was demonstrated, and rapid reconveyance of several parcels to the Appellant evidenced sham transactions. Applying the statutory benami framework, the AT concluded that the 57 sale deeds in the benamidar's name were benami and therefore unenforceable, and subsequent permission-related challenges did not vest lawful ownership in the Appellant. Appeal dismissed.