<?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>1987 (3) TMI 416 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101379</link>
    <description>Section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is an exceptional discretionary relief provision, available only where the officer shows with particulars that the default was committed honestly and reasonably. Non-deposit of employees&#039; provident fund and ESI contributions, and tax deducted at source, was treated as a continuing statutory default; financial stringency, recession, labour unrest, or expected subsidies did not justify withholding amounts deducted from employees&#039; wages or taxes collected at source. The use of certificates showing deduction while the corresponding sums were not deposited undermined the claim of honesty and reasonableness. Relief was available only to nominee and alternate directors with no role in day-to-day management or responsibility for the defaults.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:49:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (3) TMI 416 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101379</link>
      <description>Section 633(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 is an exceptional discretionary relief provision, available only where the officer shows with particulars that the default was committed honestly and reasonably. Non-deposit of employees&#039; provident fund and ESI contributions, and tax deducted at source, was treated as a continuing statutory default; financial stringency, recession, labour unrest, or expected subsidies did not justify withholding amounts deducted from employees&#039; wages or taxes collected at source. The use of certificates showing deduction while the corresponding sums were not deposited undermined the claim of honesty and reasonableness. Relief was available only to nominee and alternate directors with no role in day-to-day management or responsibility for the defaults.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101379</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>