Use of Common Business Premises Not Sufficient to Prove Benami Transaction: SAFEMA

DCIT (BPU) Vs Sara Company (Appellate Tribunal Under Safema At New Delhi) The appeals were filed under Section 46(1) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, challenging the order dated 30.07.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, which had refused to confirm the provisional attachment of property. The Adjudicating Authority had concluded that no benami transaction existed and answered the reference against the appellant. The case involved allegations that the respondent entity was acting as a benamidar for a beneficial owner. The Initiating Officer had provisionally a...