Hyderabad: The income tax department’s benami prohibition unit has provisionally attached three adjoining land parcels worth about ₹5.52 crore in Gopanpally after finding that ownership-like rights over the properties were acquired in the names of three individuals without any payment being made, officials said.The three properties, each measuring 1,210 square yards, together span 3,630 square yards in Gopanpally village of Serilingampally mandal, Rangareddy district. Sources in the income tax and registration departments said each parcel is valued at around ₹1.8 crore.The registered holders, Tirupathi Rao Sattu, Chinthalapally Amaravathi and Spoorthy Gona, have been treated as prima facie benamidars. The beneficial owners were recorded as “unknown” as investigators could not identify the persons who funded or benefited from the transactions.The attachment orders were issued by the deputy commissioner of income tax under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, and approved by the joint commissioner of income cax, benami prohibition unit, Hyderabad, on July 31. The properties cannot be transferred, converted, or otherwise dealt with until further orders from the adjudicating authority.According to the department, all three properties were acquired on May 11, 2022, through irrevocable general power of attorney documents carrying possession and sale powers. Though structured as agency arrangements, investigators found the documents conferred rights akin to ownership, including possession, unrestricted authority to sell and full control over the land.The department concluded that the arrangements resembled sale transactions in substance despite being documented as GPAs. None of the registered holders had paid any consideration for acquiring these rights, the orders said.In his sworn statement, Sattu admitted he had not paid any money for the GPA, did not possess the original documents, and had no interest in the land. The department therefore treated him as a prima facie benamidar.Amaravathi, in whose name the second property was registered, stated that she signed the documents on her husband’s instructions and was unaware of the transaction details or the source of funds. Her husband also confirmed that no consideration had been paid.For the third property, registered in Gona’s name, her husband appeared before investigators, citing her ill health. He admitted that his wife had not paid any money, did not possess the original GPA documents, and had no interest in the property. He also told investigators that the department could proceed against the land, according to the attachment order.
