Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
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 the objector had ceased to be a member of the company under Article 19 so as to avoid inclusion in the list of contributories, and whether the posting requirement in Article 19 was mandatory or merely directory.
Analysis: The objector had admitted membership, payment of subscription up to 31 December 1930, and absence of formal resignation. The only basis for claiming cessation of membership was the asserted operation of Article 19 after a notice of default. The Court held that the posting of the member's name on the notice board was a provision inserted for the company's benefit and was therefore directory, not mandatory. In the absence of clear proof that the prescribed procedure had been followed, no presumption arose in the objector's favour, while the fact that his name remained on the register of members at the time of liquidation supported the inference that he had not ceased to be a member. The benefit of a rule made solely for one party's protection could be waived by that party, and the company was not bound to insist upon the procedure.
Conclusion: The objection was overruled and the objector was rightly included in the list of contributories.
Ratio Decidendi: A procedural requirement enacted solely for the benefit of a party is directory and may be waived, and membership in the absence of clear proof of cessation continues to subsist for contributory liability.