https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200441 A director or officer proceeded against under a company-vicarious-liability provision was held liable only to the extent the statute permits for the company itself; where the punishment structure contemplated fine, imprisonment could not be imposed on that basis. Sentencing interference was also confined to cases of gross inadequacy. On the facts, the trial court had considered the accused's supervisory negligence and surrounding circumstances, so the sentence was not shown to be so inadequate as to justify appellate interference. en-us Sat, 16 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:03:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200441 A director or officer proceeded against under a company-vicarious-liability provision was held liable only to the extent the statute permits for the company itself; where the punishment structure contemplated fine, imprisonment could not be imposed on that basis. Sentencing interference was also confined to cases of gross inadequacy. On the facts, the trial court had considered the accused's supervisory negligence and surrounding circumstances, so the sentence was not shown to be so inadequate as to justify appellate interference. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 16 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200441