I've not looked into this in detail, but "mount"ing an local directory-tree is a completely different function that "imgmount"ing an actual drive image.
When you "mount" a directory tree, DosBox has to track the part and convert local file operations into host file operations. It doesn't see the actual storage of the filesystem.
Imgmount on the other hand just provides BIOS access to sectors within the image. This is just a binary file to the host which knows nothing about files within it!
The actual FAT implementation of the file system has to be done within DosBox (which sometimes has problems - I've had file operations fail on IMGMOUNTed drives - this is the main reason I created my "FDI" (FloppyDiskImage) tool to create and manipulate floppy disks images and files within them directly)
One place you can see this is "SUBST" on a local MOUNTed drive, SUBST just creates a new mount to a different point on the original MOUNT path.
... but ... SUBST doesn't work on an IMGMOUNTed drive - it doesn't have to smarts to redirect an access point to a new directory junction.
One place I effectively use IMGMOUNTed drives a lot is by BOOTing a floppy drive image.
DOSBOX BIOS correctly provides access to 512 byte (sector sized) "chunks" in that image, and a BOOTed DOS will run and access it's file system as normal (in this case the FAT implementation is being done by the booted DOS)
I have no idea why IMGMOUNT couldn't work on on a image mounted over the network. You can still read/write/seek in such an image, which is all you would need to access virtual sectors (a bit slower perhaps - but it should still work)
https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ; "Daves Old Computers" ; SW dev addict best known:
ImageDisk: rd/wr ANY floppy PChw can ; Micro-C: compiler for DOS+ManySmallCPU ; DDLINK: simple/small filetransfer(w/o netSW)via Lan/Lpt/Com