https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199930 Where shares stood in the wife's name but she paid part of the purchase price and there was no evidence that the husband furnished or intended to furnish the whole consideration at the date of purchase, subsequent payments by the husband recouped from the wife's dividends were characterised as loans or accommodations rather than transfers of the husband's assets for income-attribution purposes; mere imperfect receipts or post-facto adjustments do not relieve the Revenue of its burden to prove benami ownership, and inclusion of the dividends under section 16(3)(a)(iii) was not warranted. en-us Wed, 02 Mar 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199930 Where shares stood in the wife's name but she paid part of the purchase price and there was no evidence that the husband furnished or intended to furnish the whole consideration at the date of purchase, subsequent payments by the husband recouped from the wife's dividends were characterised as loans or accommodations rather than transfers of the husband's assets for income-attribution purposes; mere imperfect receipts or post-facto adjustments do not relieve the Revenue of its burden to prove benami ownership, and inclusion of the dividends under section 16(3)(a)(iii) was not warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Mar 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199930