https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330947 Section 543 proceedings against ex-directors require specific pleadings and proof of each director's individual misfeasance, malfeasance, misapplication of assets, or breach of trust; vague allegations or a roving enquiry are insufficient. The Court found no clear evidence that the respondents personally withheld books and records after winding up, or that they retained or benefited from current assets or surplus amounts. The alleged non-filing of statutory returns and maintenance defaults were treated as matters more properly falling under Section 541. The application under Section 543 therefore failed for want of particularised and proved wrongful acts attributable to the respondents. en-us Fri, 08 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2016 18:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330947 Section 543 proceedings against ex-directors require specific pleadings and proof of each director's individual misfeasance, malfeasance, misapplication of assets, or breach of trust; vague allegations or a roving enquiry are insufficient. The Court found no clear evidence that the respondents personally withheld books and records after winding up, or that they retained or benefited from current assets or surplus amounts. The alleged non-filing of statutory returns and maintenance defaults were treated as matters more properly falling under Section 541. The application under Section 543 therefore failed for want of particularised and proved wrongful acts attributable to the respondents. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 08 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330947