https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277551 In a disputed share transfer, the party asserting validity must prove the transfer through cogent contemporaneous records and the prescribed transfer documents. Here, the annual returns did not show the actual transfer date, and the transfer form, share certificates, or letter of allotment were not produced; the evidentiary burden was therefore not discharged and an adverse inference was drawn, with the transfer treated as fraudulent and sham. On limitation, because no definite transfer date was established from the respondents' records, the date of knowledge became material; on the stated facts, the petition was treated as filed within three years of knowledge and therefore maintainable. en-us Mon, 17 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 09 Dec 2018 09:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277551 In a disputed share transfer, the party asserting validity must prove the transfer through cogent contemporaneous records and the prescribed transfer documents. Here, the annual returns did not show the actual transfer date, and the transfer form, share certificates, or letter of allotment were not produced; the evidentiary burden was therefore not discharged and an adverse inference was drawn, with the transfer treated as fraudulent and sham. On limitation, because no definite transfer date was established from the respondents' records, the date of knowledge became material; on the stated facts, the petition was treated as filed within three years of knowledge and therefore maintainable. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 17 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277551