TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (11) TMI 306
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Having regard to the controversy involved, I will set out a few facts in each case, the common facts which are indisputable and show how the respondents came to be prosecuted by the Registrar of Companies, Goa, Daman and Diu for various lapses. The respondents, Mr. F. S. Cabral and Mrs. Ivy Ina Cabral, are the directors of M/s. Cabral & Co. P. Ltd. which was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, on April 26, 1980. In Labour Case No. 329 of 1982, the complaint filed against the directors is for contravention and non-compliance of section 210(1) and (3) as they failed to place before the annual general meeting of the company the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account for the year ending June 30, 1981. In that, the all....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tenced to imprisonment for any such offence unless it was committed wilfully. In other words, sub-section (5) of section 210 read with the proviso makes it clear that if the Magistrate comes to hold that the offence committed is not wilful, the only course open to him is to award a sentence of fine and the mandate clearly provides that there cannot be any substantive imprisonment. It is against the acquittal recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, by the judgment dated March 31, 1987, that the Registrar of Companies has come in appeal, being Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 1987. Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 1987 arises in Labour Case No. 330 of 1982 in which again by the judgment dated March 31, 1987, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny had not filed its annual returns within 60 days from the date of the first annual general meeting. The facts are again not disputed and the annual return had not been filed and again the defence had been that the directors thereof are family members, the accountant had left the services of the company and there was nothing wilful on the part of the directors in committing any breach of the provisions of the Act. An acquittal was again recorded. The story in Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 1987, which arises out of Labour Case No. 332 of 1982, is no better and for want of repetition, a brief reference need be made. This time, the complaint filed by the Registrar was under section 220(3) read with section 162 for having contravened the provis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no such discrimination and, therefore, these reasons are untenable if not perverse. The learned Magistrate having accepted facts on behalf of the Registrar in respect of which there can be no dispute qua the contraventions, what Mr. Bhobe urges has great merit. On the facts admitted, there is hardly any scope for recording acquittals of the company and its directors. Their plea that their accountant left the services of the company and left the accounts in a disarray also cannot be a ground for acquittal. Shri Bhobe rightly contends that this circumstance may be a consideration for taking a lenient view-in the matter of imposition of penalty of sentence but, however, that by itself cannot be a ground for acquitting the respondents. He ne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the position, they were unable to comply with the provisions of the Act. Thirdly, he mentions that no sooner the statutory notices were given to the company by the Registrar of Companies, on January 23, 1982, than a due reply was filed dated January 30, 1982, seeking extension of time for carrying out and complying with the requirements. In any event, he next points out that the requirements were thereafter duly carried out and what is more, the company has been complying with the different provisions from time to time for the subsequent years. The attempt on the part of learned counsel for the respondents is feeble and he knows the limitations in his way to support the acquittals. The contraventions as such are not disputed by the re....