<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Benami transaction definition applies where property remained in a nominee&#039;s name post-amendment, sustaining provisional attachment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96947</link>
    <description>Benami transaction challenge to a Provisional Attachment Order: the definition of a benami transaction under Section 2(9)(A) of the 1988 Act applies where property remained in the name of benamidars on and after the 2016 amendment, so the amendment&#039;s prospective character does not defeat attachment. The fiduciary capacity exception was not accepted on the facts; the benamidar was neither employee nor agent and the purchase was made for the benefit of the beneficial owner, including use of a Scheduled Caste nominee for registration. Consequently the tribunal found the statutory ingredients satisfied and dismissed the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 10:08:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 10:08:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886734" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Benami transaction definition applies where property remained in a nominee&#039;s name post-amendment, sustaining provisional attachment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96947</link>
      <description>Benami transaction challenge to a Provisional Attachment Order: the definition of a benami transaction under Section 2(9)(A) of the 1988 Act applies where property remained in the name of benamidars on and after the 2016 amendment, so the amendment&#039;s prospective character does not defeat attachment. The fiduciary capacity exception was not accepted on the facts; the benamidar was neither employee nor agent and the purchase was made for the benefit of the beneficial owner, including use of a Scheduled Caste nominee for registration. Consequently the tribunal found the statutory ingredients satisfied and dismissed the appeals.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 10:08:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>