https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97092 Territorial competence under the Evacuee Property law could not be based merely on a Madras branch office or on the evacuee status of shareholders. A company incorporated at Calcutta and registered in West Bengal remained a separate legal entity, and the Madras Assistant Custodian could not declare its assets evacuee property or proceed against them when the statute did not extend to that territory. The Custodian also could not confirm the order in a manner that effectively took over, controlled, or wound up the company's business and assets, as that power lay only with the High Court having jurisdiction over the company. The proceedings were therefore beyond jurisdiction. en-us Mon, 22 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:27:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97092 Territorial competence under the Evacuee Property law could not be based merely on a Madras branch office or on the evacuee status of shareholders. A company incorporated at Calcutta and registered in West Bengal remained a separate legal entity, and the Madras Assistant Custodian could not declare its assets evacuee property or proceed against them when the statute did not extend to that territory. The Custodian also could not confirm the order in a manner that effectively took over, controlled, or wound up the company's business and assets, as that power lay only with the High Court having jurisdiction over the company. The proceedings were therefore beyond jurisdiction. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 22 Jan 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97092