https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24013 The court dismissed the second appeal, holding that sham transactions do not come under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. The lower courts' findings that the transactions were sham and nominal were affirmed, granting the plaintiff the relief sought. The judgment clarified the difference between sham and benami transactions and their respective applicability under the Act. en-us Fri, 07 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Dec 2019 17:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24013 The court dismissed the second appeal, holding that sham transactions do not come under the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. The lower courts' findings that the transactions were sham and nominal were affirmed, granting the plaintiff the relief sought. The judgment clarified the difference between sham and benami transactions and their respective applicability under the Act. Case-Laws Benami Property Fri, 07 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24013