TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 15
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....int Case No. C/4881 of 2019, filed under Section 148(8) of the Companies Act, 2013 (as amended up-to-date) for alleged violation of Section 148(6) of the Companies Act. The said case is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Alipore. 2. The brief facts of the case, essential for proper and effective disposal of this case, are as under: a. Petitioner no. 1 herein is a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is an unlisted company, Petitioner no. 2 is the Company Secretary, and Petitioner no. 3 is the Chief Financial Officer of the Petitioner No. 1. b. The petitioners have come to know that the purported complaint case has been filed against them, alleging violation of Section 148(6) of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of argument, that the Cost Audit report was not filed within the stipulated period of thirty days, the consequence prescribed under section 147(1) of the Companies Act is only a monetary penalty, which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees but may extend to five lakh rupees. The complaint is not maintainable due to the delay of about 3 years, which is far beyond the statutory period of limitation for an offence punishable with fine alone. Section 468 of the CrPC clearly bars any Court from taking cognizance of an offence after expiry of the prescribed limitation period. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Opposite party submitted that the complaint was filed on the basis of their own disclosure in Form CRA-4. In the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d such provisions knowingly or willfully with the intention to deceive the company or its shareholders or creditors or tax authorities, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year [and with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to twenty-five lakh rupees or eight times the remuneration of the auditor, whichever is less]. (3) Where an auditor has been convicted under sub-section (2), he shall be liable to- (i) refund the remuneration received by him to the company; and (ii) pay for damages to the company, statutory bodies or authorities [or to members or creditors of the company] for loss arising out of incorrect or misleading statements of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te of receipt of a copy of the cost audit report prepared in pursuance of a direction under sub-section (2) furnish the Central Government with such report along with full information and explanation on every reservation or qualification contained therein." 11. Upon consideration of the facts and documents supplied by the petitioner, it appears that the Board of Directors of the company, in a meeting, approved the Cost Auditor report on 30.06.2016. At the same time, this court finds that the date of signing the Cost Auditor report and Annexure by the Cost Auditor on the same date i.e. on 30.06.2016 at Kolkata and the Form CRA-4 was submitted on 27.7.2016. If we count the period of deposit, it comes within 30 days. However, it is the case....