https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379496 The Tribunal held that the demand confirmed against a proprietorship concern cannot be recovered from the legal heirs of a deceased proprietor, citing the absence of machinery provisions for proceeding against deceased persons' legal heirs as per the ruling in Shabina Abraham's case. Recovery proceedings against the concern post the Order-in-Original were limited due to the Supreme Court's clarification on recovery provisions involving deceased individuals. The judgment aligned with the principles in Shabina Abraham's case, preventing enforcement of the demand against the deceased proprietor's legal heirs under Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1994. en-us Fri, 07 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 May 2019 10:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379496 The Tribunal held that the demand confirmed against a proprietorship concern cannot be recovered from the legal heirs of a deceased proprietor, citing the absence of machinery provisions for proceeding against deceased persons' legal heirs as per the ruling in Shabina Abraham's case. Recovery proceedings against the concern post the Order-in-Original were limited due to the Supreme Court's clarification on recovery provisions involving deceased individuals. The judgment aligned with the principles in Shabina Abraham's case, preventing enforcement of the demand against the deceased proprietor's legal heirs under Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1994. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 07 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379496