https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114042 The court found the first respondent had a reasonable excuse for not filing the statement of affairs under Section 454 of the Companies Act, as he had handed over management to the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent, however, was convicted and fined Rs. 25,000 under Section 454(5) for failing to comply with the filing requirements. Failure to establish liability beyond a reasonable doubt led to the acquittal of the other respondents. en-us Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114042 The court found the first respondent had a reasonable excuse for not filing the statement of affairs under Section 454 of the Companies Act, as he had handed over management to the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent, however, was convicted and fined Rs. 25,000 under Section 454(5) for failing to comply with the filing requirements. Failure to establish liability beyond a reasonable doubt led to the acquittal of the other respondents. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114042