Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Section 217(3) required the board to furnish full explanations only for genuine reservations, qualifications or adverse remarks in the auditor's report, so a generic comment that internal audit needed strengthening did not attract penal liability under Section 217(5). The complaint therefore disclosed no prima facie offence. Prosecution was also time-barred because there was no prior sanction requirement, no valid basis to exclude time under Section 470(3) CrPC, and no condonation sought. The Magistrate's cognizance and summons were unsustainable because the record showed no application of mind before issuing process.
Section 217(3) required the board to furnish full explanations only for genuine reservations, qualifications or adverse remarks in the auditor's report, so a generic comment that internal audit needed strengthening did not attract penal liability under Section 217(5). The complaint therefore disclosed no prima facie offence. Prosecution was also time-barred because there was no prior sanction requirement, no valid basis to exclude time under Section 470(3) CrPC, and no condonation sought. The Magistrate's cognizance and summons were unsustainable because the record showed no application of mind before issuing process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
