https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92699 AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Adjudicating Authority's confirmation of the Provisional Attachment Order under Section 24(4)(b) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. The Tribunal held the PAO validly issued with Approving Authority's concurrence and not subject to the stricter apprehension-of-alienation requirement of Section 24(3). The appellant failed to satisfactorily disclose the source of Rs. 2 crore; the transaction was found to satisfy Section 2(9)(D) as a benami transaction and the appellant was treated as benamidar. The AT ruled that taxation under Sections 68/69A of the IT Act does not preclude proceedings under the Benami Act. Appeal dismissed. en-us Sat, 20 Sep 2025 08:38:47 +0530 Sat, 20 Sep 2025 08:38:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92699 AT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the Adjudicating Authority's confirmation of the Provisional Attachment Order under Section 24(4)(b) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. The Tribunal held the PAO validly issued with Approving Authority's concurrence and not subject to the stricter apprehension-of-alienation requirement of Section 24(3). The appellant failed to satisfactorily disclose the source of Rs. 2 crore; the transaction was found to satisfy Section 2(9)(D) as a benami transaction and the appellant was treated as benamidar. The AT ruled that taxation under Sections 68/69A of the IT Act does not preclude proceedings under the Benami Act. Appeal dismissed. Highlights Benami Property Sat, 20 Sep 2025 08:38:47 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92699