<?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>Section 138: Partner Liability for Cheque Dishonor Similar to Company Director, Not Applicable to Sole Proprietorships.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=55159</link>
    <description>Dishonor of Cheque - In the context of an offence under section 138 of the Act, by virtue of Explanation (b) to section 141 of the Act, only a partner of a &#039;firm&#039; has been artificially equated to a &#039;director&#039; of a &#039;company&#039;. Its a legal fiction created in a penal statute. It must be confined to the limited to the purpose for which it has been created. Thus a partner of a &#039;firm&#039; entails the same vicarious liability towards his &#039;firm&#039; as &#039;director&#039; does towards his &#039;company&#039;, though a partnership is not an artificial person. - However, there is no indication in the statute to stretch that legal fiction to a sole proprietary concern - Besides, in the case of a sole proprietary concern, there are no two persons in existence. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:30:25 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:30:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=625150" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Section 138: Partner Liability for Cheque Dishonor Similar to Company Director, Not Applicable to Sole Proprietorships.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=55159</link>
      <description>Dishonor of Cheque - In the context of an offence under section 138 of the Act, by virtue of Explanation (b) to section 141 of the Act, only a partner of a &#039;firm&#039; has been artificially equated to a &#039;director&#039; of a &#039;company&#039;. Its a legal fiction created in a penal statute. It must be confined to the limited to the purpose for which it has been created. Thus a partner of a &#039;firm&#039; entails the same vicarious liability towards his &#039;firm&#039; as &#039;director&#039; does towards his &#039;company&#039;, though a partnership is not an artificial person. - However, there is no indication in the statute to stretch that legal fiction to a sole proprietary concern - Besides, in the case of a sole proprietary concern, there are no two persons in existence. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2020 12:30:25 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=55159</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>