https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405695 Continuation of a defaulting dealer's business may justify recovery from the successor only to the extent of assets or liability traceable to the transfer or a valid undertaking. Where the wife continued substantially the same trade from the same premises under a different name, recovery could proceed within the undertaking covering settled properties and transferred stock or former business assets. Her self-acquired immovable properties, obtained before the disputed transfer, remained outside recovery. Garnishee action against a business associate in relation to her dealership was not sustainable. Attachment could continue only until the liability covered by the undertaking was discharged, and the recovery order was quashed subject to these limits. en-us Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Mar 2022 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405695 Continuation of a defaulting dealer's business may justify recovery from the successor only to the extent of assets or liability traceable to the transfer or a valid undertaking. Where the wife continued substantially the same trade from the same premises under a different name, recovery could proceed within the undertaking covering settled properties and transferred stock or former business assets. Her self-acquired immovable properties, obtained before the disputed transfer, remained outside recovery. Garnishee action against a business associate in relation to her dealership was not sustainable. Attachment could continue only until the liability covered by the undertaking was discharged, and the recovery order was quashed subject to these limits. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405695