https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192107 In a tax reference concerning alleged benami ownership of a money-lending business carried on in a spouse's name, the Court held that the revenue could establish real ownership through direct and circumstantial evidence showing that the funds originated with the assessee, the assessee controlled the business, and borrowers dealt with him rather than the ostensible owner. Applying the principle that the party asserting benami must prove it, and noting that facts within the assessee's special knowledge attracted section 106 of the Evidence Act, the Court found the burden discharged. The wife was treated as only a name lender, and the assessment was sustained as legal. en-us Mon, 03 Jul 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 May 2017 10:55:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192107 In a tax reference concerning alleged benami ownership of a money-lending business carried on in a spouse's name, the Court held that the revenue could establish real ownership through direct and circumstantial evidence showing that the funds originated with the assessee, the assessee controlled the business, and borrowers dealt with him rather than the ostensible owner. Applying the principle that the party asserting benami must prove it, and noting that facts within the assessee's special knowledge attracted section 106 of the Evidence Act, the Court found the burden discharged. The wife was treated as only a name lender, and the assessment was sustained as legal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 03 Jul 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192107