https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459505 Complaints alleging offences under Sections 63, 68 and 628 of the Companies Act, 1956 were partly tested on limitation and on whether the pleadings disclosed the ingredients against the petitioner. The limitation objection failed for Section 68 because its maximum punishment exceeded three years, while the challenge relating to Sections 63 and 628 was not examined on merits as it had not been raised before the trial court. On merits, the complaint contained only omnibus allegations and no specific pleading of the petitioner's authorisation, knowing falsehood, recklessness, or dishonest concealment at the time of issue of the prospectus. The proceedings were quashed against the petitioner for want of a prima facie case. en-us Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Dec 2024 14:33:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459505 Complaints alleging offences under Sections 63, 68 and 628 of the Companies Act, 1956 were partly tested on limitation and on whether the pleadings disclosed the ingredients against the petitioner. The limitation objection failed for Section 68 because its maximum punishment exceeded three years, while the challenge relating to Sections 63 and 628 was not examined on merits as it had not been raised before the trial court. On merits, the complaint contained only omnibus allegations and no specific pleading of the petitioner's authorisation, knowing falsehood, recklessness, or dishonest concealment at the time of issue of the prospectus. The proceedings were quashed against the petitioner for want of a prima facie case. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459505