https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776086 The AT under SAFEMA upheld the determination that the transactions involving demonetized currency deposits and transfers constituted benami transactions under Section 2(9) of PBPTA. The Initiating Officer and Ld. AA provided sufficient reasons to believe the arrangements were benami. The appellant's reliance on judgments contesting the existence of reasons to believe was rejected. No appeal was filed by the benamidar. Consequently, the property was confirmed as benami, with the enterprise recognized as the beneficial owner and the individual as the benamidar. The appeal was dismissed. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776086 The AT under SAFEMA upheld the determination that the transactions involving demonetized currency deposits and transfers constituted benami transactions under Section 2(9) of PBPTA. The Initiating Officer and Ld. AA provided sufficient reasons to believe the arrangements were benami. The appellant's reliance on judgments contesting the existence of reasons to believe was rejected. No appeal was filed by the benamidar. Consequently, the property was confirmed as benami, with the enterprise recognized as the beneficial owner and the individual as the benamidar. The appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Benami Property Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776086