https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6398 A transfer restriction clause in company articles does not, by itself, destroy the statutory concept of free transferability of shares for section 23A purposes unless there is evidence that the power to refuse registration was actually exercised so as to eliminate genuine transferability. On the facts discussed, there was no material showing practical restriction of transfers or cogent proof that a concerted group controlled the company. Mere holding of more than 75% of the shares by two public companies in which the public were substantially interested was therefore insufficient, without more, to attract section 23A. en-us Tue, 09 Jan 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6398 A transfer restriction clause in company articles does not, by itself, destroy the statutory concept of free transferability of shares for section 23A purposes unless there is evidence that the power to refuse registration was actually exercised so as to eliminate genuine transferability. On the facts discussed, there was no material showing practical restriction of transfers or cogent proof that a concerted group controlled the company. Mere holding of more than 75% of the shares by two public companies in which the public were substantially interested was therefore insufficient, without more, to attract section 23A. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Jan 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6398