https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774434 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld the Adjudicating Authority's finding that property purchased by appellant was benami. Despite appellant's claim of having agricultural income from paddy sales, bank statements showed insufficient funds to acquire property worth Rs.50,73,000. The tribunal noted significant withdrawals and payments that depleted appellant's account, and appellant failed to prove paddy sales worth Rs.4,84,840. Evidence revealed the property was purchased to evade loan dues of Rs.198 crores owed to Canara Bank, with the real owner using appellant as a front. The tribunal found respondents discharged initial burden of proof while appellant failed to establish legitimate source of income for the purchase. en-us Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Jul 2025 08:50:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774434 The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA upheld the Adjudicating Authority's finding that property purchased by appellant was benami. Despite appellant's claim of having agricultural income from paddy sales, bank statements showed insufficient funds to acquire property worth Rs.50,73,000. The tribunal noted significant withdrawals and payments that depleted appellant's account, and appellant failed to prove paddy sales worth Rs.4,84,840. Evidence revealed the property was purchased to evade loan dues of Rs.198 crores owed to Canara Bank, with the real owner using appellant as a front. The tribunal found respondents discharged initial burden of proof while appellant failed to establish legitimate source of income for the purchase. Case-Laws Benami Property Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774434