<?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>Partner Can File Cheque Bounce Complaint Without Explicit Firm Authorization, Directors Remain Criminally Liable Under Section 138</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89504</link>
    <description>HC held that a partner can file a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act without explicit firm authorization. The complaint against corporate directors was deemed maintainable under Section 141, with specific averments establishing accountability. Moratorium under IBC Section 14 does not bar criminal proceedings against directors for cheque dishonor. The court rejected the application to quash the complaint, finding no jurisdictional infirmity in the proceedings and affirming the partner&#039;s implied authority to initiate legal action on behalf of the partnership firm.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:28 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=829853" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Partner Can File Cheque Bounce Complaint Without Explicit Firm Authorization, Directors Remain Criminally Liable Under Section 138</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89504</link>
      <description>HC held that a partner can file a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act without explicit firm authorization. The complaint against corporate directors was deemed maintainable under Section 141, with specific averments establishing accountability. Moratorium under IBC Section 14 does not bar criminal proceedings against directors for cheque dishonor. The court rejected the application to quash the complaint, finding no jurisdictional infirmity in the proceedings and affirming the partner&#039;s implied authority to initiate legal action on behalf of the partnership firm.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:28 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>