https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208262 In a dematerialised share transaction, beneficial owner entry in depository records was held not conclusive between the parties where the surrounding documents showed the shares were delivered only as security for a loan. The ITAT, Mumbai applied the law of pledge and held that section 28 of the Depositories Act preserves the general law, so depository procedure is not the exclusive mode for creating a pledge. Because the transaction was a genuine pledge and not an outright sale, the assessee did not acquire taxable proprietary benefit, and the alleged difference between market value and transfer value was not assessable as a benefit or perquisite under section 2(24)(iv). en-us Fri, 19 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 May 2013 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208262 In a dematerialised share transaction, beneficial owner entry in depository records was held not conclusive between the parties where the surrounding documents showed the shares were delivered only as security for a loan. The ITAT, Mumbai applied the law of pledge and held that section 28 of the Depositories Act preserves the general law, so depository procedure is not the exclusive mode for creating a pledge. Because the transaction was a genuine pledge and not an outright sale, the assessee did not acquire taxable proprietary benefit, and the alleged difference between market value and transfer value was not assessable as a benefit or perquisite under section 2(24)(iv). Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 19 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208262