<?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>2026 (8) TMI 167 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796294</link>
    <description>An independent Chartered Accountant who certifies statutory e-Forms is not an officer or officer in default merely by performing that professional function; separate criminal liability requires material showing active complicity. Prosecution for false statements requires specific allegations or evidence of knowing falsity, intentional concealment, or connivance, rather than certification alone. Responsibility for accurate filings primarily rests with the company and its directors. A prosecution for the stated offence is subject to the applicable three-year limitation period and cannot proceed after its expiry without valid condonation. The notes state that discharge was sustained because no factual basis established the professional&#039;s mens rea and the complaint was time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2026 09:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 167 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796294</link>
      <description>An independent Chartered Accountant who certifies statutory e-Forms is not an officer or officer in default merely by performing that professional function; separate criminal liability requires material showing active complicity. Prosecution for false statements requires specific allegations or evidence of knowing falsity, intentional concealment, or connivance, rather than certification alone. Responsibility for accurate filings primarily rests with the company and its directors. A prosecution for the stated offence is subject to the applicable three-year limitation period and cannot proceed after its expiry without valid condonation. The notes state that discharge was sustained because no factual basis established the professional&#039;s mens rea and the complaint was time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>