Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
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.