https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98147 Cheating was not made out because the underwriting agreement was found genuine, which negatived any allegation that the arrangement itself was fictitious. No proved representation was shown to have deceived the company into paying the underwriting commission, and the fact that shares were canvassed by persons other than the named underwriters did not by itself establish fraudulent or dishonest inducement. The charge also did not support an alternative case based on deception through the statutory report, and the matter could not be converted into criminal breach of trust in the absence of a State appeal against acquittal on that count. en-us Fri, 08 May 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:17:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98147 Cheating was not made out because the underwriting agreement was found genuine, which negatived any allegation that the arrangement itself was fictitious. No proved representation was shown to have deceived the company into paying the underwriting commission, and the fact that shares were canvassed by persons other than the named underwriters did not by itself establish fraudulent or dishonest inducement. The charge also did not support an alternative case based on deception through the statutory report, and the matter could not be converted into criminal breach of trust in the absence of a State appeal against acquittal on that count. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 08 May 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98147