https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105222 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a former director of a company, in a case challenging a complaint under section 220 of the Companies Act for non-filing of financial documents post-resignation. The court found that the petitioner, having resigned before the offense date, was not considered an officer in default as per section 5 of the Act. The court emphasized timely resignation acceptance and Form No. 32 submission, absolving the petitioner of liability. The complaint against the petitioner was quashed, with no opinion expressed on the remaining aspects of the complaint. en-us Mon, 12 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Mar 2012 11:09:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105222 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a former director of a company, in a case challenging a complaint under section 220 of the Companies Act for non-filing of financial documents post-resignation. The court found that the petitioner, having resigned before the offense date, was not considered an officer in default as per section 5 of the Act. The court emphasized timely resignation acceptance and Form No. 32 submission, absolving the petitioner of liability. The complaint against the petitioner was quashed, with no opinion expressed on the remaining aspects of the complaint. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 12 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105222