TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 502
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the appellant Thota Kanna Rao of Rajamundry, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh along with his wife Smt. Thota Venkata Ramana, Directors of M/s Krishna Stockists & Traders Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Sri Krishna Agri Process India Pvt. Ltd. have availed loans from several banks providing overvalued properties as security and subsequently defaulted in repayment. A loan of Rs.198,55,06,244/- was due from the appellant Thota Kanna Rao and his associates to Canara Bank for which an e-auction notice was issued on 30.01.2019. The properties pledged as security were put for sale at reserve price of Rs.29,82,80,000/- as against the amount of Rs.198 Crores and odd. 3. To avoid recovery of the amount by the financial institution, the appellant Thota Kanna Rao entered into a benami transaction so as to transfer the property in the name of benamidar Chikkam Subba Rao who was not having adequate source of income yet property was registered in his name. He was not having even Pan Card and not filing any returns of income. 4. The respondents initiated the case and accordingly show cause notice was issued to the benamidar with a copy to the beneficial owner though it has come on record that noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reported in (2004) 7 SCC 233 was given where it was held that burden of prove benami transaction lies on the person who alleges the transaction to be a benami. Going adverse to the settled law, the respondents casted burden on the appellant to prove that the property was purchased from known sources and thus is not a benami property. It is without realizing that initial burden lies on the person who alleges a benami transaction. 8. The learned counsel for the appellants then referred to the facts of the case and submitted that the source to acquire the land was disclosed. The appellant was agriculturist and was having income out of sale of paddy. The appellant acquired the considerable money even from his mother out of three sale deeds executed by her and it was reflected in the account but conveniently ignored by the respondents. 9. Referring to the explanation dated 02.06.2019 submitted by the appellant, source to possess a sum of Rs.35,24,840/- was given but ignored. The amount aforesaid was available with the appellant while entering into sale agreement and thereupon the sale deed. The other amount was also disclosed which was transferred by the mother. The total amount was R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a consideration of Rs.50,73,000/- in the name of Chikkam Subba Rao. 15. The proceedings were initiated thereupon with issuance of show cause notice by the respondents said to have remained undelivered due to "insufficient address" and thereupon served through the office of Income Tax Officer at the same address where it could not be served earlier finding it to be "insufficient address". The appellant was given an opportunity to file reply to the show cause notice. 16. The summons were issued on 05.03.2019 and served on 16.05.2019. Reply to the notice was to be given within 15 days i.e. 31.05.2019 but was furnished on 04.06.2019 and 05.06.2019 i.e. subsequent to the period given to the appellant and accordingly on the day the period expired, the provisional attachment order was passed which has been questioned by the appellant on the ground that no opportunity of hearing was given. 17. We do not find any substance in the aforesaid argument because initially show cause notice dated 05.03.2019 was issued on 07.03.2019 to call upon the reply but when it remained unserved due to "insufficient address", the Income Tax Officer was requested to effect the service which was effected on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ULAR AMOUNT BANK ENTRY(S) AS PER PAGE NO. 33 TO 55 OF REJOINDER 05.07.2018 Undru Manjula Trsf 3,50,000/- Rs. 30,000/- and Rs, 2,70,000/- cash withdrawl on 06.07.2018 (Page 38 of Rejoinder) 14.02.2018 Amount received on selling paddy 4,84,840/- (No proof of any Mandi receipt) 07.08.2018 Trsf from Grace Raju c/o Undru Manjula 7,00,000/- Rs. 1,40,000/- withdrawn on 17.08.2018; 4,00,000/- withdrawn on 27.08.2018 and Rs. 5,50,059/- paid to some RK Agencies on 11.09.2018; Nothing paid for land purchased on 03.11.2018 as bank balance shows Rs. 6 lacs plus credit. 09.08.2018 Undru Manjula Trsf 8,00,000/- Rs. 1,40,000/- withdrawn on 17.08.2018; Rs 4,00,000/- withdrawn on 27.08.2018 and Rs. 5,50,059/- paid to some RK Agencies on 11.09.2018; Nothing paid for land purchased on 03.11.2018 as bank balance shows Rs. 6 lacs plus credit. 14.08.2018 Undru Manjula Trsf 3,00,000/- Rs. 1,40,000/- withdrawn on 17.08.2018; Rs.4,00,000/- withdrawn on 27.08.2018 and Rs. 5,50,059/- paid to some RK Agencies on 11.09.2018; Nothing paid for land purchased on 03.11.2018 as bank balance shows Rs. 6 lacs plus credit. 15.09.2018 Undru Manjula Trsf 5,00,000/- Bank balance increased ....