Dismissing the appeal the Court held that benami transactions are forbidden by reason of section 3 however no action lies, nor can any defense in a suit be taken, based on any benami transaction in terms of section 4 and onus of establishing that a transaction is benami is upon one who asserts it . Accordingly the order of High Court is affirmed . Referred Binapani Paul v. Pratima Ghosh (2007) 6 SCC 100.
Fair Communication & Consultants v. Surendra Kardile ( 2020 ) 269 Taxman 453 (SC)
Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988
S.3: Prohibition of benami transactions – Right to recover property held benami – Onus of establishing that a transaction is benami is upon one who asserts it . [ S.4 ]
Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988
S.3: Prohibition of benami transactions – Right to recover property held benami – Onus of establishing that a transaction is benami is upon one who asserts it . [ S.4 ]