https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103387 Liability of a company officer under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act arises only where the prosecution proves that the person was, at the relevant time, in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business. Mere designation as managing director is insufficient without evidence connecting the accused to those statutory requirements. On the materials produced, that foundational proof was absent, and the criminal burden was not discharged. The acquittal was therefore upheld. en-us Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:19:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103387 Liability of a company officer under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act arises only where the prosecution proves that the person was, at the relevant time, in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business. Mere designation as managing director is insufficient without evidence connecting the accused to those statutory requirements. On the materials produced, that foundational proof was absent, and the criminal burden was not discharged. The acquittal was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103387