9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 1123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see's hands due to the clinching reason that the prescribed Adjudicating Authority u/s. 71 of the Prohibition of Benami Transaction Act, 1988's order dt. 19-12-2017 has already given a conclusive finding of the fact that the real beneficiary herein is one Smt. Renuka Datla only. We thus uphold the learned CIT(A)'s action deleting the impugned addition(s) for this precise reason alone a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tated to be attributable to the reasons mentioned in its condonation petition/affidavit and on account of no rebuttal thereof from assessee's side, this delay stands condoned therefore. 3. Coming to the Revenue's sole substantive grievance that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in reversing assessment findings treating this assessee as a benamidar thereby making short term capita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,40,000/- in the capacity of Benamidar and Smt. Renuka Datla was considered as beneficial owner of the property. Thereafter, assessment order was passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 assessing the capital gains of ₹ 4,07,99,300/- in the hands of Smt. Renuka Datla for A.Y. 2010-11, dated 19-12-2017 holding that Smt. Renuka Datla was the actual owner of the property and the appellant Sri D. Nagappa i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Considering the facts conveyed in order u/s. 24(4) passed by I.O. investigation conducted by the I.O., material in possessions of I.O., statement of the 'defendants and submissions of the I.O. and the defendants it is held that the property/money deposited in bank accounts under attachment is benami property and is subject matter of benami transactions within the meaning of section 2(8) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e clinching reason that the prescribed Adjudicating Authority u/s. 71 of the Prohibition of Benami Transaction Act, 1988's order dt. 19-12-2017 (supra) has already given a conclusive finding of the fact that the real beneficiary herein is one Smt. Renuka Datla only. We thus uphold the learned CIT(A)'s action deleting the impugned addition(s) for this precise reason alone as there is no bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
