https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98763 Inspectors conducting a statutory investigation under the Companies Act 1948 had to act fairly because their report could have serious civil, criminal and reputational consequences. They were required to give the affected directors a reasonable opportunity to answer adverse criticism, but the form and timing of that opportunity remained flexible and within the inspectors' discretion, subject to fairness. The directors were not entitled at the outset to transcripts, cross-examination of witnesses, or advance disclosure of draft adverse findings, as such requirements would hamper an inquisitorial inquiry conducted with expedition and confidentiality. The appeal therefore failed, and the procedural safeguards already offered were held sufficient within the scope of the inquiry. en-us Mon, 13 Jul 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Feb 2018 10:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98763 Inspectors conducting a statutory investigation under the Companies Act 1948 had to act fairly because their report could have serious civil, criminal and reputational consequences. They were required to give the affected directors a reasonable opportunity to answer adverse criticism, but the form and timing of that opportunity remained flexible and within the inspectors' discretion, subject to fairness. The directors were not entitled at the outset to transcripts, cross-examination of witnesses, or advance disclosure of draft adverse findings, as such requirements would hamper an inquisitorial inquiry conducted with expedition and confidentiality. The appeal therefore failed, and the procedural safeguards already offered were held sufficient within the scope of the inquiry. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 13 Jul 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98763