TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 501
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort 'the Act of 1988) against the adjudicating order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 26(3) of the Act of 1988. The learned counsel submitted that the appellant belongs to scheduled caste and was involved in construction work, part time agricultural worker and other jobs. He even worked as a driver with a close relative of Mr. Suraj Singh Patel and Mrs. Reema Singh, wife of Mr. Suraj Singh Patel. He also worked for construction of the house of Mr. Suraj Singh Patel and Mrs. Reema Singh and therefore was acquainted with them. The appellant intended to purchase a property belonging to Mr. Ghasitey Lal, a scheduled caste person. As per the provision of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, a property belonging to schedu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roperty to Mrs. Reema Singh. It was with the further understanding that the loan amount of Rs. 24 lakhs would be considered to be advance payment on behalf of Mrs. Reema Singh. It so happened that Mr. Ghasitey Lal passed away in October, 2022 and thereupon a litigation was initiated by his legal heirs despite the entry of the name of the appellant in the revenue record on 26.11.2022 but the legal heirs of Mr. Ghasitey lal challenged the sale of the land through power of attorney holder Mr. Manish Singh. The power of attorney was said to be forged. An FIR was also registered by the wife of Mr. Ghasitey Lal followed by civil suit in February, 2023. The appellant did not anticipate the legal dispute and accordingly he decided to enter into se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd accordingly the money was transferred to the appellant for future benefit of the beneficial owner to acquire the property. The fact in relation to the agreement to sale of the property to Mrs. Reema Singh has been ignored by the respondent and accordingly the Impugned Order deserves to the set aside. The learned counsel for the appellant made a reference of definition of "benami transaction" given under the Act of 1988 by way of an amendment by the amending Act of 2016. It is to show that the case in hand does not involve benami transaction rather land does not exist in the name of appellant rather with the cancellation of the deed on settlement with the legal heirs of Mr. Ghasitey Lal, it exists in the name of legal heirs. The prayer w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Naib Tehsildar shows admission of the case and had fixed it for the objection of the appellant on 31.07.2023 as is coming out from the Annexure A-5. The appellant has wrongly taken it an order of de-mutation of the property and in fact if it would be remutated in the name of legal heirs of Mr. Ghasitey Lal, the appellant may not have challenged the attachment of the property if he is not the owner. The challenge to the Impugned Order shows deep interest of the appellant in the property in question. The elaborate argument was made by the counsel for the respondent and would be referred while recording the finding in reference to the argument of the appellant. FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL The appeal has been preferred to challenge the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roperty was to be transferred to his wife Mrs. Reema Singh. The agricultural land was mutated in the name of appellant and mutation entry has not been quashed though proceeding in that regard has been initiated. A copy of the order passed by Naib Tehsildar at Annexure A-5 shows cognizance of the issue raised by the legal heirs of Mr. Gashitey Lal. The matter was pending and was posted on 31.07.2023. The appellant has not placed on record a copy of the order for cancellation or the deletion of the name of the appellant from the revenue record and otherwise no document has been submitted by the appellant to cancel the registered sale deed executed by the power of attorney holder Mr. Manish Singh in favour of the appellant for the agricultura....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re benefit of the beneficial owner. The bank statement of Mr. Suraj Singh Patel and appellant shows transfer of amount of consideration for a sum of Rs. 24 lakhs and for the remaining amount of Rs. 30 lakhs, the appellant had given post dated cheques and accordingly the registered sale deed was executed in his favour. The appellant has failed to disclose the source of Rs. 30 lakhs and even if it is ignored, there is nothing on record to show repayment of Rs. 24 lakhs to Mr. Suraj Singh Patel other than the averment. The appellant could have produced the bank statement to show repayment of amount but he has failed to do so. Thus, a case for benami transaction is made out where the appellant is been taken as a benamidaar. The theory propound....