Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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.