https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102112 A complaint alleging non-filing of a company's balance-sheet and profit and loss account disclosed a prima facie case against a director where it specifically pleaded that he was knowingly guilty of the default or knowingly authorised or permitted it. The High Court held that such averments were sufficient to proceed under section 220(3) of the Companies Act, 1956. The director's plea that compliance was prevented by circumstances beyond his control raised disputed facts requiring evidence and could not be accepted at the quashing stage. The revision petitions failed, and the prosecution was allowed to continue. en-us Fri, 28 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:06:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102112 A complaint alleging non-filing of a company's balance-sheet and profit and loss account disclosed a prima facie case against a director where it specifically pleaded that he was knowingly guilty of the default or knowingly authorised or permitted it. The High Court held that such averments were sufficient to proceed under section 220(3) of the Companies Act, 1956. The director's plea that compliance was prevented by circumstances beyond his control raised disputed facts requiring evidence and could not be accepted at the quashing stage. The revision petitions failed, and the prosecution was allowed to continue. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 28 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102112