https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280676 A proprietary concern has no separate legal existence from its proprietor, so a lease or transferable interest in the proprietor's own premises requires a legally distinct transferee and valid transfer. Rent receipts alone did not prove that the attached premises had been validly transferred out of the applicant's ownership or that a separate tenancy had been created in favour of another legal entity. The applicant also failed to prove the extent of any alleged occupation by the respondent, while the respondent's registered office was shown at the premises. On that evidence, no legally recognizable right, title, or interest was established to displace execution attachment, which was sustained and the challenge failed. en-us Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 May 2019 15:55:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280676 A proprietary concern has no separate legal existence from its proprietor, so a lease or transferable interest in the proprietor's own premises requires a legally distinct transferee and valid transfer. Rent receipts alone did not prove that the attached premises had been validly transferred out of the applicant's ownership or that a separate tenancy had been created in favour of another legal entity. The applicant also failed to prove the extent of any alleged occupation by the respondent, while the respondent's registered office was shown at the premises. On that evidence, no legally recognizable right, title, or interest was established to displace execution attachment, which was sustained and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280676