https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782391 HC considered cognizance for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 IPC and Section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, based on use of forged C-Forms and misappropriation of sales tax by a company. On examination of resignation letters, Form 32, and absence of any challenge to those documents, HC found that Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 3 had ceased to be directors well before the alleged fraud in AY 2007-08 and could not be held liable. As no reliable resignation proof existed for Petitioner No. 2, proceedings against that petitioner were allowed to continue. The petition was allowed in part, quashing proceedings only for Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3. en-us Thu, 20 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:24:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782391 HC considered cognizance for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 IPC and Section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, based on use of forged C-Forms and misappropriation of sales tax by a company. On examination of resignation letters, Form 32, and absence of any challenge to those documents, HC found that Petitioner No. 1 and Petitioner No. 3 had ceased to be directors well before the alleged fraud in AY 2007-08 and could not be held liable. As no reliable resignation proof existed for Petitioner No. 2, proceedings against that petitioner were allowed to continue. The petition was allowed in part, quashing proceedings only for Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Thu, 20 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782391