Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
The law regarding the liability of a director for an offence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act committed by a company is well-established. Section 141, being a penal provision, must be strictly construed. Only directors who were in charge of the day-to-day affairs and responsible for the conduct of the company's business can be held liable. The word 'in-charge of business' implies having overall control of the day-to-day business. To establish vicarious liability, the complainant must show that the director was associated with the day-to-day affairs and management. A director cannot be accused based on a cursory statement or vague averment. The appropriate pleadings/averments will be determined case-by-case. In the present case, the complaint contained necessary averments in line with Section 141, stating that the petitioner, along with other directors, was jointly and severally responsible and in charge of the company's business and management. The petition was dismissed.
The law regarding the liability of a director for an offence u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act committed by a company is well-established. Section 141, being a penal provision, must be strictly construed. Only directors who were in charge of the day-to-day affairs and responsible for the conduct of the company's business can be held liable. The word 'in-charge of business' implies having overall control of the day-to-day business. To establish vicarious liability, the complainant must show that the director was associated with the day-to-day affairs and management. A director cannot be accused based on a cursory statement or vague averment. The appropriate pleadings/averments will be determined case-by-case. In the present case, the complaint contained necessary averments in line with Section 141, stating that the petitioner, along with other directors, was jointly and severally responsible and in charge of the company's business and management. The petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
