Benami s.27(2) — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section Benami s.27(2), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Kavita Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v Initiating Officer
ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
I bought a property from a company that is now said to have held it benami, and the attachment came without any notice to me. Can I get it lifted?
Yes, on this order. The Appellate Tribunal set aside the provisional attachment and allowed the appeal, holding that the Initiating Officer must satisfy himself of four matters before attaching under s.24(3), that a purchaser whose sale deed is on record is entitled to notice under s.24(1), and that the initial burden of showing that the purchase was not bona fide lies on the Initiating Officer and must be discharged by cogent evidence.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.
