<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1960 (9) TMI 30 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97763</link>
    <description>A director charged with breach of statutory duties under the Companies Act, 1913 could not avoid liability by relying on the absence of a general meeting where the accused officers were themselves responsible for that omission. The Court held that the duty to prepare and file the shareholders&#039; list and summary, and to lay the balance-sheet and profit and loss account before the company in general meeting, was not extinguished by the failure to hold the meeting. The obligation to convene the meeting was a separate duty with its own penalty and did not displace liability for the statutory defaults. The contrary view was rejected, and the acquittal was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2014 11:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (9) TMI 30 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97763</link>
      <description>A director charged with breach of statutory duties under the Companies Act, 1913 could not avoid liability by relying on the absence of a general meeting where the accused officers were themselves responsible for that omission. The Court held that the duty to prepare and file the shareholders&#039; list and summary, and to lay the balance-sheet and profit and loss account before the company in general meeting, was not extinguished by the failure to hold the meeting. The obligation to convene the meeting was a separate duty with its own penalty and did not displace liability for the statutory defaults. The contrary view was rejected, and the acquittal was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97763</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>