https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=79069 The High Court addressed the issue of criminal liability in a cheque dishonor case involving a company. The complainant failed to specify the authorized signatory or the person in charge of daily affairs. Referring to a Supreme Court ruling, it was established that individuals responsible for a company's affairs can be summoned and penalized u/s 138 with Section 141 of NI Act. The complainant asserted that the accused were fully responsible for the company's operations, shifting the burden to the accused to prove any restrictions on their powers. The court found no flaws in summoning the accused, dismissing the petition. en-us Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:14:44 +0530 Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:14:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=79069 The High Court addressed the issue of criminal liability in a cheque dishonor case involving a company. The complainant failed to specify the authorized signatory or the person in charge of daily affairs. Referring to a Supreme Court ruling, it was established that individuals responsible for a company's affairs can be summoned and penalized u/s 138 with Section 141 of NI Act. The complainant asserted that the accused were fully responsible for the company's operations, shifting the burden to the accused to prove any restrictions on their powers. The court found no flaws in summoning the accused, dismissing the petition. Highlights Indian Laws Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:14:44 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=79069