Corporate veil protects director's personal assets from company VAT recovery absent statutory authority or piercing grounds.

A company director's personal property could not be attached to recover the company's VAT dues because the company and its directors remain distinct legal entities. The Gujarat HC noted that the VAT Act did not treat the director as personally liable for the company's tax debt, and no material justified lifting the corporate veil. In the absence of statutory authority or facts warranting personal fastening of liability, recovery from the director's residential assets was impermissible. The attachment order was therefore quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the personal property of a company director could be attached for recovery of the company's VAT dues and whether the corporate veil could be lifted to fasten such liability on the director.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the settled principle that a company and its directors are distinct legal entities. The statutory scheme of the VAT Act did not treat a director as a dealer for the purpose of personal recovery, and no material was placed to justify piercing the corporate veil. In the absence of any provision fastening the company's tax liability on the director personally, attachment of the director's residential property was found impermissible.

Conclusion: The attachment of the petitioner's personal property for recovery of the company's VAT dues was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The impugned attachment order was quashed and the petition succeeded, as the Court held that the company's tax dues could not be recovered from the director's personal assets on the facts presented.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of statutory authorization or facts warranting lifting of the corporate veil, the tax liability of a company cannot be enforced against the personal property of its director.

---