https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83274 The complaint was time-barred and filed beyond the stipulated period u/s 142(b) of the NI Act. The demand notice was served to the accused company through email on 11.03.2022, which constituted effective service on the directors as well. The limitation period commenced from the date of service, and the complaint filed on 28.04.2022 was beyond the prescribed time limit without seeking condonation of delay. The trial court took cognizance without considering the delay, rendering the complaint not maintainable. Consequently, the criminal complaint was quashed, and the order taking cognizance was set aside by the High Court. en-us Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83274 The complaint was time-barred and filed beyond the stipulated period u/s 142(b) of the NI Act. The demand notice was served to the accused company through email on 11.03.2022, which constituted effective service on the directors as well. The limitation period commenced from the date of service, and the complaint filed on 28.04.2022 was beyond the prescribed time limit without seeking condonation of delay. The trial court took cognizance without considering the delay, rendering the complaint not maintainable. Consequently, the criminal complaint was quashed, and the order taking cognizance was set aside by the High Court. Highlights Indian Laws Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83274