Fraudulently obtained SEIS scrips cannot support customs exemption; recovery, confiscation and penalties were sustained, but employee penalty fell awa...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5081 to 5100 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.