https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199241 A holding company cannot be fastened with liability for an alleged foreign exchange remittance contravention said to have arisen in relation to a subsidiary company merely because it holds the majority shareholding. The separate legal personality of the company and its subsidiary must be respected, and any obligation to account for the remittance must attach to the entity to which the remittance is attributable. On the material placed, the statutory breach, if any, lay with the subsidiary company, so proceeding against the holding company under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was against the wrong person and the adjudication order was unsustainable. en-us Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:25:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199241 A holding company cannot be fastened with liability for an alleged foreign exchange remittance contravention said to have arisen in relation to a subsidiary company merely because it holds the majority shareholding. The separate legal personality of the company and its subsidiary must be respected, and any obligation to account for the remittance must attach to the entity to which the remittance is attributable. On the material placed, the statutory breach, if any, lay with the subsidiary company, so proceeding against the holding company under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 was against the wrong person and the adjudication order was unsustainable. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199241