https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111769 A company officer's statutory duty to file a true and correct statement of affairs was examined where the filing was delayed and found incomplete and unreliable. The court treated the unexplained treatment of a major transaction as evidence of non-compliance, and a plea of resignation did not absolve liability because the accused were directly involved in the relevant transactions. Liability under section 454(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 was therefore affirmed, while wider allegations of fund siphoning were left to the pending criminal trial. en-us Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2014 08:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111769 A company officer's statutory duty to file a true and correct statement of affairs was examined where the filing was delayed and found incomplete and unreliable. The court treated the unexplained treatment of a major transaction as evidence of non-compliance, and a plea of resignation did not absolve liability because the accused were directly involved in the relevant transactions. Liability under section 454(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 was therefore affirmed, while wider allegations of fund siphoning were left to the pending criminal trial. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111769