https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338956 At the discharge stage, the Court must only determine whether the record discloses a prima facie case and must not assess the evidence as if at trial. Applying that standard, the Madras HC found sufficient material showing that the petitioner was a director, acted as chairperson in a board meeting, signed relevant documents and resolutions, and was connected with the company's business transactions. Those facts were enough to attract the company liability principle under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, which permits prosecution of persons in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business. The refusal to discharge was therefore sustained and the challenge failed. en-us Wed, 01 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Feb 2017 07:59:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338956 At the discharge stage, the Court must only determine whether the record discloses a prima facie case and must not assess the evidence as if at trial. Applying that standard, the Madras HC found sufficient material showing that the petitioner was a director, acted as chairperson in a board meeting, signed relevant documents and resolutions, and was connected with the company's business transactions. Those facts were enough to attract the company liability principle under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, which permits prosecution of persons in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business. The refusal to discharge was therefore sustained and the challenge failed. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 01 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338956