https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96823 Whether a managing director eo nomine was "knowingly and wilfully" a party to a default under Section 76(1) of the Companies Act was analysed by focusing on the mens rea requirement for directorial criminal liability; the article explains the evidential standard demanded proof of actual knowledge and willful participation and finds the available evidence did not establish that mental element against the director, resulting in the conclusion that the conviction could not be sustained and any fine must be refunded. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 1940 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jan 2012 13:17:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96823 Whether a managing director eo nomine was "knowingly and wilfully" a party to a default under Section 76(1) of the Companies Act was analysed by focusing on the mens rea requirement for directorial criminal liability; the article explains the evidential standard demanded proof of actual knowledge and willful participation and finds the available evidence did not establish that mental element against the director, resulting in the conclusion that the conviction could not be sustained and any fine must be refunded. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 04 Apr 1940 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96823