https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30056 The court held that the assessee company, despite being the de facto owner of shares, was not entitled to receive dividends as it was not the registered shareholder. Emphasizing the importance of ownership and registration, the court referred to relevant provisions of the Indian Companies Act and Securities Contracts Act, along with Accounting Standard (AS) 9. It upheld that dividends must be paid to the registered shareholder or their order, and without registration, the assessee could not claim the dividend income. The burden of proof for taxable income was placed on the department, highlighting the requirement for actual receipt of income for taxation purposes. en-us Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30056 The court held that the assessee company, despite being the de facto owner of shares, was not entitled to receive dividends as it was not the registered shareholder. Emphasizing the importance of ownership and registration, the court referred to relevant provisions of the Indian Companies Act and Securities Contracts Act, along with Accounting Standard (AS) 9. It upheld that dividends must be paid to the registered shareholder or their order, and without registration, the assessee could not claim the dividend income. The burden of proof for taxable income was placed on the department, highlighting the requirement for actual receipt of income for taxation purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 12 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30056