Applicant company is engaged in manufacturing of ceramic wall tiles, agreed to supply ceramic tile to company ACPL for consideration of Rs. 75 lakhs-ACPL paid Rs. 75 lakhs to applicant towards supply of ceramic tiles through company DMPL.  However, on finding that ACPL was not genuine and was involved in money laundering activity, appellant returned Rs. 75 lakhs received from ACPL by cancelling order. Initiating Officer held that applicant was a beneficial owner of Rs. 75 lakhs routed in its bank account by company ACPL through DMPL. Accordingly, Initiating Officer attached bank account of appellant in which said Rs. 75 lakhs was transferred. Tribunal held that no material was placed nor available on record proving that appellant had entered into any benami transaction or in any way a beneficial owner of amount in question. Initiating Officer had not said anything substantial against appellant. Accordingly on facts, appellant could not be held as a beneficial owner with regards to amount transferred in account of assessee hence the order of attachment of bank account of appellant was set aside.