Director liability under MVAT cannot be fastened for recovery from a public company; attachment orders were unsustainable.

Section 44(6) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 fastens a director's liability only in relation to recovery from a private company and operates subject to the Companies Act, 2013. Because the company concerned was a public limited company, the statutory basis for proceeding against a non-executive director did not survive. Recovery measures, including the prohibitory order, demand notice and attachment, were therefore without legal sanction and could not be sustained against the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether recovery proceedings, including the prohibitory order, demand notice and attachment order, could be sustained against a non-executive director of a public limited company under Section 44(6) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002.

Analysis: Section 44(6) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 makes a director's liability depend upon the recovery of dues from a private company and is expressly subject to the Companies Act, 2013. The statutory distinction between a private company and a public company, as defined in the Companies Act, 2013, is material to the operation of that provision. Once it was admitted that the company concerned was a public limited company, the basis for fastening liability on the petitioner as a director under Section 44(6) did not survive. The recovery measures, including attachment of the petitioner's flats, were therefore without legal sanction.

Conclusion: The impugned recovery orders could not be sustained against the petitioner and were liable to be quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 44(6) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 applies only in relation to a private company and cannot be invoked to recover dues from a director of a public company.

---