https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783253 ITAT held that the same investment in immovable property cannot be simultaneously assessed in the hands of both the alleged real owner and the assessee treated as benamidar. Observing that the substantive assessment in the hands of the alleged real owner and the protective/benami assessment in the hands of the assessee were inextricably linked, the Tribunal restored the matter to CIT(A). CIT(A) was directed to hear and decide both appeals together, examining the merits comprehensively before determining the correct person assessable. The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2025 08:55:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783253 ITAT held that the same investment in immovable property cannot be simultaneously assessed in the hands of both the alleged real owner and the assessee treated as benamidar. Observing that the substantive assessment in the hands of the alleged real owner and the protective/benami assessment in the hands of the assessee were inextricably linked, the Tribunal restored the matter to CIT(A). CIT(A) was directed to hear and decide both appeals together, examining the merits comprehensively before determining the correct person assessable. The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783253