https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91254 The AT held that the respondent discharged the onus of proving the benami nature of the transaction under the PBPT Act, as amended in 2016. Contrary to the appellant's contention that no transfer of consideration occurred for the benamidar's future benefit, the Tribunal found evidence demonstrating that the beneficial owner advanced funds to the benamidar, who subsequently deposited the money with two companies linked to the appellant. The appellant's reliance on precedent was rejected as inapplicable. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the finding of a benami transaction and ruled against the appellant, upholding the revenue's case. en-us Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:27 +0530 Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91254 The AT held that the respondent discharged the onus of proving the benami nature of the transaction under the PBPT Act, as amended in 2016. Contrary to the appellant's contention that no transfer of consideration occurred for the benamidar's future benefit, the Tribunal found evidence demonstrating that the beneficial owner advanced funds to the benamidar, who subsequently deposited the money with two companies linked to the appellant. The appellant's reliance on precedent was rejected as inapplicable. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the finding of a benami transaction and ruled against the appellant, upholding the revenue's case. Highlights Benami Property Tue, 05 Aug 2025 07:54:27 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91254