https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30055 The court held that the Tax Recovery Officer (TRO) lacked jurisdiction to declare a transaction as benami and that the TRO's orders of attachment and sale proclamation were without jurisdiction. The court emphasized that the burden of proving a benami transaction lies with the Department and that the petitioner was entitled to seek relief through the writ petition. The court quashed the TRO's orders, directing the Department to establish its claim through a civil suit and restraining the petitioner from alienating the properties for three months. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs. en-us Tue, 20 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30055 The court held that the Tax Recovery Officer (TRO) lacked jurisdiction to declare a transaction as benami and that the TRO's orders of attachment and sale proclamation were without jurisdiction. The court emphasized that the burden of proving a benami transaction lies with the Department and that the petitioner was entitled to seek relief through the writ petition. The court quashed the TRO's orders, directing the Department to establish its claim through a civil suit and restraining the petitioner from alienating the properties for three months. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 20 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30055