<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (11) TMI 1027 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310771</link>
    <description>Vicarious criminal liability of company officers under the Essential Commodities Act depends on the statutory category they fall within and on specific factual averments in the complaint. For officers covered by the provision applicable to directors and other officers, liability requires allegations of consent, connivance or neglect; mere designation as a director is insufficient without particulars of individual involvement. Persons said to be in charge of and responsible for the company&#039;s business stand on a different footing, as the statute attaches liability on that basis subject to rebuttal. The discussion also notes that process should be reconsidered where the complaint and supporting material do not clearly establish the prima facie foundation for proceeding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:40:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732003" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 1027 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310771</link>
      <description>Vicarious criminal liability of company officers under the Essential Commodities Act depends on the statutory category they fall within and on specific factual averments in the complaint. For officers covered by the provision applicable to directors and other officers, liability requires allegations of consent, connivance or neglect; mere designation as a director is insufficient without particulars of individual involvement. Persons said to be in charge of and responsible for the company&#039;s business stand on a different footing, as the statute attaches liability on that basis subject to rebuttal. The discussion also notes that process should be reconsidered where the complaint and supporting material do not clearly establish the prima facie foundation for proceeding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>