https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770671 Gujarat HC held that criminal prosecution of a partner of an audit firm under the Companies Act, 2013 cannot proceed on a bare complaint where the firm is not arraigned and the pleadings do not contain specific averments of the partner's personal involvement, fraudulent conduct, abetment, or collusion. Alleged non-disclosure of related party transactions in the audit report, even with reference to Accounting Standard 18, was insufficient to sustain vicarious criminal liability against the partner in his individual capacity. The court also noted that the accounting standard itself defined the relevant relationship concept, and the prosecution's demand for a separate articulation of the degree of relationship was not warranted. The complaint was therefore quashed. en-us Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 May 2025 10:04:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770671 Gujarat HC held that criminal prosecution of a partner of an audit firm under the Companies Act, 2013 cannot proceed on a bare complaint where the firm is not arraigned and the pleadings do not contain specific averments of the partner's personal involvement, fraudulent conduct, abetment, or collusion. Alleged non-disclosure of related party transactions in the audit report, even with reference to Accounting Standard 18, was insufficient to sustain vicarious criminal liability against the partner in his individual capacity. The court also noted that the accounting standard itself defined the relevant relationship concept, and the prosecution's demand for a separate articulation of the degree of relationship was not warranted. The complaint was therefore quashed. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770671