<?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>1966 (7) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98343</link>
    <description>Directors bear the primary duty to prepare and file statutory balance-sheets and cannot rely on temporary seizure of company papers if they had reasonable opportunities to inspect seized records; the court found that annual meetings were held and returns filed, and audit difficulties arose only after the directors&#039; duty to prepare accounts, so relief under the statutory excuse provision was unavailable and convictions were sustained. Separately, criminal liability for failure to place and file accounts was upheld because factual findings showed directors failed to take required steps despite access to records, justifying fines and dismissal of revision petitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:21:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135400" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (7) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98343</link>
      <description>Directors bear the primary duty to prepare and file statutory balance-sheets and cannot rely on temporary seizure of company papers if they had reasonable opportunities to inspect seized records; the court found that annual meetings were held and returns filed, and audit difficulties arose only after the directors&#039; duty to prepare accounts, so relief under the statutory excuse provision was unavailable and convictions were sustained. Separately, criminal liability for failure to place and file accounts was upheld because factual findings showed directors failed to take required steps despite access to records, justifying fines and dismissal of revision petitions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>