<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (1) TMI 496 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114040</link>
    <description>Personal liability for a private company&#039;s tax arrears could not be fastened on ex-directors under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, because Section 19B applies only where the company has been wound up and the directors held office at that time. The company had not been wound up, so the statutory basis for recovery was absent. Rule 40 was held to be merely procedural and could not independently create director liability or support recovery in the absence of the substantive conditions in the Act. In the absence of any winding-up order or other basis to lift the corporate veil, the demand notice against the ex-directors was without jurisdiction and unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2014 12:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 496 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114040</link>
      <description>Personal liability for a private company&#039;s tax arrears could not be fastened on ex-directors under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, because Section 19B applies only where the company has been wound up and the directors held office at that time. The company had not been wound up, so the statutory basis for recovery was absent. Rule 40 was held to be merely procedural and could not independently create director liability or support recovery in the absence of the substantive conditions in the Act. In the absence of any winding-up order or other basis to lift the corporate veil, the demand notice against the ex-directors was without jurisdiction and unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114040</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>