https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98628 Specific savings under the Companies Act, 1956 displaced the general preservation rule in the General Clauses Act where they showed a contrary legislative intention. Only prosecutions instituted or directed before commencement of the 1956 Act were preserved; a later prosecution under the repealed 1913 Act was therefore unsustainable. Relief for company officers under the 1956 Act depended on whether the officer acted honestly and reasonably and ought fairly to be excused in the circumstances. Criminal intention was not the governing test, because the provision created discretionary relief from liability rather than an acquittal based on criminal-law principles. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:22:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98628 Specific savings under the Companies Act, 1956 displaced the general preservation rule in the General Clauses Act where they showed a contrary legislative intention. Only prosecutions instituted or directed before commencement of the 1956 Act were preserved; a later prosecution under the repealed 1913 Act was therefore unsustainable. Relief for company officers under the 1956 Act depended on whether the officer acted honestly and reasonably and ought fairly to be excused in the circumstances. Criminal intention was not the governing test, because the provision created discretionary relief from liability rather than an acquittal based on criminal-law principles. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 01 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98628