https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313284 Bank account attachment to recover VAT arrears of another entity was held unjustified where the petitioner's proprietor had only a past association with the defaulting company and no proved continuing nexus, representation, or control. Liability could not be fastened on the petitioner absent evidence to justify lifting the corporate veil or treating the two concerns as one. Recovery from the petitioner's account without notice and without legal basis was arbitrary interference with property and violated Article 300-A of the Constitution. The petitioner was entitled to refund with interest. en-us Mon, 06 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Apr 2024 19:17:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313284 Bank account attachment to recover VAT arrears of another entity was held unjustified where the petitioner's proprietor had only a past association with the defaulting company and no proved continuing nexus, representation, or control. Liability could not be fastened on the petitioner absent evidence to justify lifting the corporate veil or treating the two concerns as one. Recovery from the petitioner's account without notice and without legal basis was arbitrary interference with property and violated Article 300-A of the Constitution. The petitioner was entitled to refund with interest. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 06 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313284