<?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>1985 (9) TMI 298 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101416</link>
    <description>After the 1977 amendment to section 220(3) of the Companies Act, 1956, failure to file the balance-sheet and profit and loss account within thirty days of the latest date by which the annual general meeting should have been held constitutes a default even if no meeting was actually held. Directors fall within the expression &quot;officer&quot; and are liable as officers in default where they knowingly omit compliance after notice and no lawful excuse is shown. Because punishment is linked to a daily fine for continuing non-compliance, the offence is treated as continuing, so prosecution is not wholly barred by limitation and may proceed for the period within six months before cognizance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:00:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (9) TMI 298 - HIGH COURT OF ORISSA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101416</link>
      <description>After the 1977 amendment to section 220(3) of the Companies Act, 1956, failure to file the balance-sheet and profit and loss account within thirty days of the latest date by which the annual general meeting should have been held constitutes a default even if no meeting was actually held. Directors fall within the expression &quot;officer&quot; and are liable as officers in default where they knowingly omit compliance after notice and no lawful excuse is shown. Because punishment is linked to a daily fine for continuing non-compliance, the offence is treated as continuing, so prosecution is not wholly barred by limitation and may proceed for the period within six months before cognizance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>