https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797453 Benami classification under Section 2(9)(C) requires that the ostensible owner be unaware of, or deny knowledge of, the property ownership. Job workers acknowledged during cross-examination that they knew of the share allotment, buy-back and consideration credited to their bank accounts. These statements outweighed inconsistent earlier income-tax statements. Allegations of fictitious trade payables or tax evasion could not independently establish a benami transaction without satisfying the statutory knowledge requirement. The income-tax settlement order did not override the separate benami regime. The share transactions therefore fell outside Section 2(9)(C), and refusal to confirm provisional attachment was sustained. en-us Tue, 18 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Aug 2026 10:33:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797453 Benami classification under Section 2(9)(C) requires that the ostensible owner be unaware of, or deny knowledge of, the property ownership. Job workers acknowledged during cross-examination that they knew of the share allotment, buy-back and consideration credited to their bank accounts. These statements outweighed inconsistent earlier income-tax statements. Allegations of fictitious trade payables or tax evasion could not independently establish a benami transaction without satisfying the statutory knowledge requirement. The income-tax settlement order did not override the separate benami regime. The share transactions therefore fell outside Section 2(9)(C), and refusal to confirm provisional attachment was sustained. Case-Laws Benami Property Tue, 18 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797453