https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433200 The High Court held that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC remains available despite the bar on a second revision under Section 397(3), so the maintainability objection failed. It further held that the period taken for the Central Government's internal consideration before authorising filing of the complaint was not excludable under Section 470(3) CrPC, because the Companies Act provisions involved no statutory previous sanction or consent. As the complaint was filed beyond limitation and no sufficient cause for condonation was shown under Section 473, the complaint was time-barred and rejection of the condonation application was upheld. en-us Thu, 19 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2023 10:11:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433200 The High Court held that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC remains available despite the bar on a second revision under Section 397(3), so the maintainability objection failed. It further held that the period taken for the Central Government's internal consideration before authorising filing of the complaint was not excludable under Section 470(3) CrPC, because the Companies Act provisions involved no statutory previous sanction or consent. As the complaint was filed beyond limitation and no sufficient cause for condonation was shown under Section 473, the complaint was time-barred and rejection of the condonation application was upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 19 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433200