<?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>2025 (3) TMI 255 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766870</link>
    <description>SC held that non-executive directors cannot be held liable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without specific allegations demonstrating their direct involvement in company affairs. The court emphasized that mere directorship does not create automatic liability; only those actively in charge of day-to-day business operations can be held accountable. The complaint lacked specific averments establishing direct nexus between appellants and financial transactions. Their involvement was purely non-executive, limited to governance oversight without extending to financial decision-making or operational management. Criminal proceedings against appellants were quashed and appeal allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 10:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=804320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 255 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766870</link>
      <description>SC held that non-executive directors cannot be held liable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without specific allegations demonstrating their direct involvement in company affairs. The court emphasized that mere directorship does not create automatic liability; only those actively in charge of day-to-day business operations can be held accountable. The complaint lacked specific averments establishing direct nexus between appellants and financial transactions. Their involvement was purely non-executive, limited to governance oversight without extending to financial decision-making or operational management. Criminal proceedings against appellants were quashed and appeal allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766870</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>