https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759699 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld the Adjudicating Authority's finding that chit funds and assets were acquired through benami transactions. The appellant's statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act during search proceedings, admitting that assets were purchased in his name at another person's instance, were held admissible in revenue proceedings. The Tribunal distinguished criminal proceedings from revenue proceedings, noting that sworn statements can be relied upon for attachment and penalty proceedings without requiring separate inquiry. The appellant failed to substantiate claimed agricultural and poultry income sources, and maturity amounts were transferred to the beneficial owner's firm, constituting clinching evidence of benami transactions. en-us Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Oct 2024 09:08:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759699 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld the Adjudicating Authority's finding that chit funds and assets were acquired through benami transactions. The appellant's statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act during search proceedings, admitting that assets were purchased in his name at another person's instance, were held admissible in revenue proceedings. The Tribunal distinguished criminal proceedings from revenue proceedings, noting that sworn statements can be relied upon for attachment and penalty proceedings without requiring separate inquiry. The appellant failed to substantiate claimed agricultural and poultry income sources, and maturity amounts were transferred to the beneficial owner's firm, constituting clinching evidence of benami transactions. Case-Laws Benami Property Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759699