https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112086 Complaints alleging violations relating to collective investment schemes were held to disclose a prima facie case where they contained foundational averments that the company and its officers were in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. Section 27 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 was applied to fasten officer liability subject to proof at trial, while disputes about whether a director had ceased office, or lacked actual responsibility, were treated as evidentiary issues not suitable for quashing under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Form 32 was noted as relevant but not ative on its own. en-us Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2014 17:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112086 Complaints alleging violations relating to collective investment schemes were held to disclose a prima facie case where they contained foundational averments that the company and its officers were in charge of and responsible for the company's business at the relevant time. Section 27 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 was applied to fasten officer liability subject to proof at trial, while disputes about whether a director had ceased office, or lacked actual responsibility, were treated as evidentiary issues not suitable for quashing under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Form 32 was noted as relevant but not ative on its own. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112086