https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778285 AT upheld attachment of seized cash as benami property, holding cash falls within the PBPT definition of property. The first appellant was properly proceeded against under ss.2(9)(C) and 2(9)(D); two accompanying appellants were not liable as benamidars since the cash was neither recovered from nor claimed by them. Prior approval under s.23 was unnecessary once a show-cause notice was issued. The IO's reliance on existing material and opportunity to reply satisfied s.24 procedures, and absence of a fresh independent inquiry did not vitiate the proceedings. en-us Mon, 08 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Sep 2025 08:47:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778285 AT upheld attachment of seized cash as benami property, holding cash falls within the PBPT definition of property. The first appellant was properly proceeded against under ss.2(9)(C) and 2(9)(D); two accompanying appellants were not liable as benamidars since the cash was neither recovered from nor claimed by them. Prior approval under s.23 was unnecessary once a show-cause notice was issued. The IO's reliance on existing material and opportunity to reply satisfied s.24 procedures, and absence of a fresh independent inquiry did not vitiate the proceedings. Case-Laws Benami Property Mon, 08 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778285