<?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>2014 (7) TMI 489 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249452</link>
    <description>Sales tax or trade tax dues of a company cannot ordinarily be recovered from the personal assets of its directors or authorised representative. Corporate personality remains distinct, and personal recovery is permissible only where a statute expressly authorises it or where specific facts justify lifting the corporate veil, such as fraud, sham dealings, diversion of funds, or use of the company as a mask to evade liability. On the stated facts, there was no pleading or proof of fraud, siphoning, or personal gain, so the recovery notice against the individuals was held unsustainable and the department was left to proceed only against the company and its assets.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 15:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=359793" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 489 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249452</link>
      <description>Sales tax or trade tax dues of a company cannot ordinarily be recovered from the personal assets of its directors or authorised representative. Corporate personality remains distinct, and personal recovery is permissible only where a statute expressly authorises it or where specific facts justify lifting the corporate veil, such as fraud, sham dealings, diversion of funds, or use of the company as a mask to evade liability. On the stated facts, there was no pleading or proof of fraud, siphoning, or personal gain, so the recovery notice against the individuals was held unsustainable and the department was left to proceed only against the company and its assets.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249452</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>