Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The AT upheld the findings of benami transactions against the appellant and dismissed the appeal. It held that substantial cash deposits in a dummy bank account of a benamidar firm, with no genuine business activity and no supporting sale agreement or documented transaction, established that the appellant was the beneficial owner of the funds. The appellant's plea of ignorance, alleging that her husband operated the bank account, was rejected as legally untenable. The AT further held that subsequent reassessment or surrender of amounts as undisclosed income under s.148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, could not retrospectively nullify or regularize the earlier benami transactions under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
The AT upheld the findings of benami transactions against the appellant and dismissed the appeal. It held that substantial cash deposits in a dummy bank account of a benamidar firm, with no genuine business activity and no supporting sale agreement or documented transaction, established that the appellant was the beneficial owner of the funds. The appellant's plea of ignorance, alleging that her husband operated the bank account, was rejected as legally untenable. The AT further held that subsequent reassessment or surrender of amounts as undisclosed income under s.148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, could not retrospectively nullify or regularize the earlier benami transactions under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.