Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, in the absence of a specific statutory provision and without factual basis to lift the corporate veil, the tax dues of a company under liquidation could be recovered from the personal assets of its director.
Analysis: The recovery was sought from the petitioner personally only because he had been a director of the company under liquidation. The record did not disclose any material showing that the corporate personality was a cloak, mask, sham, or device used to evade tax, nor any finding of fraud, misfeasance, or similar exceptional circumstance justifying disregard of separate legal personality. The applicable principle, as recognised in tax matters, is that personal recovery from directors is not permissible merely because company dues remain unpaid; such recovery must rest on a clear statutory provision or on facts warranting lifting of the corporate veil. The cited statutory schemes showed that where the legislature intended personal liability, it expressly provided for it, and no comparable provision was shown for recovery from the petitioner in the present case.
Conclusion: Recovery of the company's tax dues from the petitioner's personal assets was impermissible. The issue is decided in favour of the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: A director's personal assets cannot be proceeded against for recovery of a company's tax dues unless the statute expressly so provides or the authority establishes facts justifying piercing the corporate veil.