<?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>2026 (8) TMI 346 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796473</link>
    <description>Confirmation of attachment of bank funds as alleged benami property could not rest on an incomplete investigation. The material did not establish that the appellant supplied demonetised currency to the alleged benamidar companies, while their actual control, incorporation, shareholding, bank operations, management and third-party dealings remained unverified. The appellant&#039;s bullion-sale explanation also required verification because stock registers, VAT returns and supporting sale documentation were not produced. The attachment confirmation was therefore unsustainable on the existing record, and the matter was remanded for comprehensive re-investigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 346 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796473</link>
      <description>Confirmation of attachment of bank funds as alleged benami property could not rest on an incomplete investigation. The material did not establish that the appellant supplied demonetised currency to the alleged benamidar companies, while their actual control, incorporation, shareholding, bank operations, management and third-party dealings remained unverified. The appellant&#039;s bullion-sale explanation also required verification because stock registers, VAT returns and supporting sale documentation were not produced. The attachment confirmation was therefore unsustainable on the existing record, and the matter was remanded for comprehensive re-investigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Benami Property</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796473</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>