https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751741 Advancing funds for a property purchase did not, by itself, justify taxing the financier as the real purchaser or owner. The Revenue had to prove a benami or colourable arrangement with cogent evidence, including control, possession, title custody, motive, and surrounding circumstances, and that burden was not discharged. The sale deeds stood in the name of Shri T. Nadakrishna, so the alleged business income addition in the assessee's hands was deleted. Because the substantive addition failed, the connected protective addition in Shri T. Nadakrishna's hands could not be mechanically sustained and was remitted for fresh adjudication on merits after hearing the parties. en-us Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Apr 2024 08:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751741 Advancing funds for a property purchase did not, by itself, justify taxing the financier as the real purchaser or owner. The Revenue had to prove a benami or colourable arrangement with cogent evidence, including control, possession, title custody, motive, and surrounding circumstances, and that burden was not discharged. The sale deeds stood in the name of Shri T. Nadakrishna, so the alleged business income addition in the assessee's hands was deleted. Because the substantive addition failed, the connected protective addition in Shri T. Nadakrishna's hands could not be mechanically sustained and was remitted for fresh adjudication on merits after hearing the parties. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751741