https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113810 Punishment for non-filing of a statement of affairs under section 454(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 requires proof that the default occurred without reasonable excuse. Where the accused sought extension of time, the official liquidator did not decide that request, and access to records for preparing the statement remained incomplete, criminal liability was not established. Directions for personal attendance under rule 130 and costs under section 626 were also unwarranted because the underlying default itself was not proved. The complaint therefore failed and the accused was discharged. en-us Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Oct 2014 11:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113810 Punishment for non-filing of a statement of affairs under section 454(5) of the Companies Act, 1956 requires proof that the default occurred without reasonable excuse. Where the accused sought extension of time, the official liquidator did not decide that request, and access to records for preparing the statement remained incomplete, criminal liability was not established. Directions for personal attendance under rule 130 and costs under section 626 were also unwarranted because the underlying default itself was not proved. The complaint therefore failed and the accused was discharged. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113810