https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101497 Conviction for non-compliance with the annual return requirement was unsustainable because the prosecution did not prove that the petitioner was a director or an officer in default. The only material relied on to show directorship was a Form No. 32 return filed by the managing director, but it was not treated as an admission by the petitioner and was not supported by verification from company records. The complaint also lacked a specific averment that he was the officer in default, and no evidence established such liability. The conviction and sentence were therefore set aside. en-us Mon, 04 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:47:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101497 Conviction for non-compliance with the annual return requirement was unsustainable because the prosecution did not prove that the petitioner was a director or an officer in default. The only material relied on to show directorship was a Form No. 32 return filed by the managing director, but it was not treated as an admission by the petitioner and was not supported by verification from company records. The complaint also lacked a specific averment that he was the officer in default, and no evidence established such liability. The conviction and sentence were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 04 May 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101497