Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computationa...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4561 to 4580 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal held that flats purchased with consideration paid by the appellant, but registered in the names of others who did not pay for them, fell within the statutory definition of benami transaction. It further held that the amended definition under Section 2(9)(A) covered property still held in benamidars' names after the 2016 amendment, so the challenge based on pre-amendment origin failed. The objection that provisional attachment concerned non-existent property was also rejected because allotment letters were issued, consideration was paid, and registered agreements existed. Provisional attachment and its confirmation were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal held that flats purchased with consideration paid by the appellant, but registered in the names of others who did not pay for them, fell within the statutory definition of benami transaction. It further held that the amended definition under Section 2(9)(A) covered property still held in benamidars' names after the 2016 amendment, so the challenge based on pre-amendment origin failed. The objection that provisional attachment concerned non-existent property was also rejected because allotment letters were issued, consideration was paid, and registered agreements existed. Provisional attachment and its confirmation were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.