ORDER K. Raviraja Pandian, J. - The petitioner filed the original petitions, praying to call for the records of the respondent in form No. 5 dated January 9, 2004 issued under section 27 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and quash all the connected proceedings thereon. Those original petitions are numbered as these writ petitions on being transferred to the file of this court. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent, without any rhyme or reason, has issued a notice on April 17, 2003 to the petitioner alleging that there are arrears of sales tax to an extent of Rs. 4,33,794 in respect of Maheshwari Iron and Steel (P) Ltd., for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1995-96 (TNGST) and 1995-96 (CST); Rs. 22,795 (TNGST) and Rs. 1,65,215 (CST) in respect of Hindustan Steel Distributors for the assessment year 1993-94; Rs. 12,42,261 in respect of TSN Marketing (India) Ltd., for the assessment year 1998-99 and directed to pay the amount along with penalty. The petitioner by his letter through his advocate dated November 28, 2003 informed the respondent that the petitioner was not the proprietor/director of the assessee as stated in the notice. The proceedings have been initiated against a retired person, who has nothing to do with the assessee and the respondent was required to drop the proceedings through his Advocate's letter above referred to dated November 28, 2003. However, without considering the same, now the property of the petitioner at door No. 3, I Main Road, CIT colony, Mylapore, Chennai, has been attached by means of an impugned notice dated January 9, 2004. On that basis the present writ petitions have been filed. I have heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. The property of the petitioner, who has nothing to do with the assessees, cannot be attached or proceeded against for the arrears of tax payable by the proprietary concern, as the petitioner has resigned from the directorship of those companies. There cannot be any doubt that the tax due to the Government has to be collected, but for that purpose a third party should not be directed to pay the tax. It is settled law that a director of the company cannot be proceeded against for the tax payable by the company, as the company is a legal entity by itself. It is settled law that a director of the company cannot be proceeded against for the tax payable by the company, as the company is a legal entity by itself. The liability of the director of a company, for that matter, retired director of the company has been dealt with by this court in the case of Sri George J. Mathew v. CTO, Bodinayakanur, Theni District [2002] 1 CTC 285 by a learned single judge of this Court and in the case of Chamundeeswari v. Commercial Tax Officer, Vellore Rural in writ petitions Nos. 3085 and 3086 of 2000 by an order dated January 5, 2007 ([2007] 6 VST 399 (Mad)), I have held that a company is a legal entity by itself and it can sue or can be sued as a legal entity and any dues from the company have to be recovered only from the company and not from its directors, by relying on the judgments of various High Courts, such as in the cases of Desiraju Venkatakrishna Sarma, In re, [1955] 25 Comp Cas 32 (AP), Lalita Shivaram Ubhaykar v. Commercial Tax Officer, XII Circle, Bangalore [1975] 35 STC 267 (Karn), Ramachandran v. State of Kerala [1984] 55 STC 209 (Ker), Punalur Paper Mills Ltd. v. District Collector, Quilon [1985] 60 STC 193 (Ker), Nishad Patel v. State of Kerala [1999] 113 STC 395 (Ker), Subhash Chandra Kankaria v. State of Rajasthan [1999] 114 STC 413 (RTT) and the statutory provision of the TNGST Act. Hence, in the light of the decisions referred to above and for the reasons stated above, the impugned notices are hereby set aside by giving liberty to the assessing officer to proceed further to recover the amount due from the assessee - companies, in accordance with law and statutory provisions. The writ petitions are ordered in the above terms. No costs.