Under the Companies Act 2013, lifting (or piercing) of the corporate veil is permissible by the court in cases such as:

1. Indian and English courts have lifted the corporate veil in narrow, exceptional categories: (a) FRAUD/SHAM: Gilford Motor Co. v. Horne, [1933] Ch 935 (company formed to evade employment covenant); (b) EVASION OF STATUTE: Re Bugle Press, [1961] Ch 270; (c) ENEMY CHARACTER in war: Daimler Co. Ltd. v. Continental Tyre, [1916] 2 AC 307; (d) AGENCY: Smith Stone & Knight v. Birmingham Corp., [1939] 4 All ER 116; (e) ALTER EGO: Adams v. Cape Industries, [1990] Ch 433; (f) JUSTICE OF THE CASE: Workmen of Associated Rubber Industry v. Associated Rubber Industry, (1985) 4 SCC 114 (India). 2. The veil is NOT lifted merely because shareholding changes or annual return is filed late. 3. Hence option B is correct. _Source: Companies Act 2013 (Act 18 of 2013), Govt. of India MCA — Multiple cases — Daimler Co. Ltd. v. Continental Tyre & Rubber Co., [1916] 2 AC 307; Adams v. Cape Industries, [1990] Ch 433_