<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Cash &amp; gold found during IT search claimed as held for safe custody, not benami transaction. Adjudicating Authority refused attachment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80996</link>
    <description>Benami transaction case involving cash and gold found during Income Tax search u/s 132. Statements recorded, including alleged beneficial owner Nagarajan. Adjudicating Authority refused to confirm provisional attachment order u/s 24(4)(a)(i) of 1988 Act. Exception u/s 2(9)(A) of 1988 Act applied as property held for safe custody, not benami transaction. Appellate Tribunal disagreed with Adjudicating Authority&#039;s reasoning but rejected reference and attachment, as transaction fell under exception to definition of &quot;benami transaction.&quot; Property belonged to Nagarajan as per Income Tax assessment order. Appeal by Deputy Commissioner dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 08:19:36 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 08:19:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=766428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Cash &amp; gold found during IT search claimed as held for safe custody, not benami transaction. Adjudicating Authority refused attachment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80996</link>
      <description>Benami transaction case involving cash and gold found during Income Tax search u/s 132. Statements recorded, including alleged beneficial owner Nagarajan. Adjudicating Authority refused to confirm provisional attachment order u/s 24(4)(a)(i) of 1988 Act. Exception u/s 2(9)(A) of 1988 Act applied as property held for safe custody, not benami transaction. Appellate Tribunal disagreed with Adjudicating Authority&#039;s reasoning but rejected reference and attachment, as transaction fell under exception to definition of &quot;benami transaction.&quot; Property belonged to Nagarajan as per Income Tax assessment order. Appeal by Deputy Commissioner dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 08:19:36 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=80996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>