Statutory filing default under company law attracts liability even where non-compliance is said to be beyond control.

Non-filing of the balance-sheet and profit and loss account under section 220 of the Companies Act, 1956 attracts liability once default is established; the statute does not create an exemption merely because the omission is said to be beyond the company's control. The High Court held that section 220(3) read with section 162 fixes punishment on the company and every officer in default for non-compliance with sections 220(1) and 220(2). The company's acquittal was therefore unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for de novo trial against the company alone.

---

---

Issues: Whether the company could be acquitted for failure to file the balance-sheet and profit and loss account on the ground that the default was due to reasons beyond its control under section 220 of the Companies Act, 1956.

Analysis: Section 220(3) makes the company and every officer in default liable to the punishment provided in section 162 where there is non-compliance with sections 220(1) and 220(2). The statutory scheme does not carve out an exemption from liability merely because the default is said to be involuntary or beyond the control of the company. Once default in filing is established, the liability under the provision follows.

Conclusion: The acquittal of the company was unsustainable. The order of acquittal was set aside and the matter was remitted for de novo trial only in respect of the company.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent of reinstating criminal liability against the company for alleged statutory default, while the acquittal was otherwise left undisturbed and the matter was sent back for fresh trial against the company alone.

Ratio Decidendi: Mere default in complying with the filing requirements under section 220 attracts liability, and no exemption is available merely because the non-filing is asserted to be beyond the company's control.

---