<?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>2018 (3) TMI 1070 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357367</link>
    <description>A person who has validly resigned from a company and whose resignation has been accepted cannot be proceeded against as a continuing director for later enforcement action based on that office. The Supreme Court of India held that, where the record showed resignation had been tendered and duly accepted, the basis for fastening liability and attaching the individual&#039;s bank accounts could not be sustained. The impugned order was therefore set aside insofar as he was concerned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:35:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514059" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 1070 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357367</link>
      <description>A person who has validly resigned from a company and whose resignation has been accepted cannot be proceeded against as a continuing director for later enforcement action based on that office. The Supreme Court of India held that, where the record showed resignation had been tendered and duly accepted, the basis for fastening liability and attaching the individual&#039;s bank accounts could not be sustained. The impugned order was therefore set aside insofar as he was concerned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357367</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>