https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111270 A mere omission or inexact statement in a directors' report does not attract liability under section 628 of the Companies Act, 1956 unless the statement is knowingly false or made with intent to conceal a material fact. The Calcutta High Court noted that the alleged misstatement about continued erosion of net worth was supported by the annual report as a whole and did not conceal the company's financial position. It also held that non-disclosure of the NHB condition attached to prudential norm relaxation did not amount to knowing concealment, as the record showed substantial compliance with the condition's substance. Relief under section 633(2) was therefore available. en-us Fri, 11 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:36:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111270 A mere omission or inexact statement in a directors' report does not attract liability under section 628 of the Companies Act, 1956 unless the statement is knowingly false or made with intent to conceal a material fact. The Calcutta High Court noted that the alleged misstatement about continued erosion of net worth was supported by the annual report as a whole and did not conceal the company's financial position. It also held that non-disclosure of the NHB condition attached to prudential norm relaxation did not amount to knowing concealment, as the record showed substantial compliance with the condition's substance. Relief under section 633(2) was therefore available. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 11 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111270