https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169435 Mens rea is ordinarily required for criminal liability unless the statute or delegated order clearly excludes it, so no liability arose under clause 22 read with clause 5 for the acts of servants. By contrast, clause 27A imposed a duty on the supplier himself to ensure proper endorsement, and that obligation was treated as absolute for that purpose, so contravention remained attributable to the supplier even though the omission was committed by servants. The convictions under clause 22 read with clause 5 were quashed, while the conviction under clause 27A was maintained. en-us Mon, 19 Mar 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:54:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169435 Mens rea is ordinarily required for criminal liability unless the statute or delegated order clearly excludes it, so no liability arose under clause 22 read with clause 5 for the acts of servants. By contrast, clause 27A imposed a duty on the supplier himself to ensure proper endorsement, and that obligation was treated as absolute for that purpose, so contravention remained attributable to the supplier even though the omission was committed by servants. The convictions under clause 22 read with clause 5 were quashed, while the conviction under clause 27A was maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 19 Mar 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169435