Gautam Gupta Vs Initiating Officer (Appellate Tribunal Under SAFEMA At New Delhi)
Tribunal Confirms Benami Transaction but Orders Re-Adjudication on Property Link Benami Cash Route through
Tribunal heard an appeal under Section 46 of the Benami Act against the Adjudicating Authority’s order confirming attachment of property No. B-404, Meera Bagh, Paschim Vihar, treating it as benami.
During demonetisation, ₹43.5 lakh of unaccounted cash belonging to the appellant was routed through Shri Atul Tyagi’s firm M/s Mac Allied Sales Corp., & transferred back to the appellant’s firm M/s Ajanta Overseas as an accommodation entry. Both Tyagi & the appellant admitted this before the Income-tax Department. The Authority treated this as a benami transaction & held that part of the cash was utilised for purchasing the attached property.
The appellant contended that the property was bought by his mother, Smt. Anju Gupta, from genuine sale proceeds of her earlier DDA property, & that the ₹43.5 lakh was already disclosed & accepted in his ITR. He argued the funds had no link with the attached property.
The Tribunal held that a benami transaction indeed occurred since the cash was held by Tyagi for the appellant’s benefit & later retransferred, violating Section 6. However, inconsistencies in the appellant’s explanation & missing documents (like bank & ITR records) prevented a conclusive finding on whether the Meera Bagh property was purchased from benami proceeds.
