9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay. While taking cognizance, the learned Trial Court has to apply its mind as to whether the complaint presented was within the period of limitation or not. The learned Trial Court must also consider whether there were sufficient grounds to condone the delay that may have occurred in the presentation of the complaint. But in the two cases at hand, clearly, the learned Trial Court overlooked the filing of the application for condonation of delay. The mind has not been applied to the question of condonation of delay and the complaint being within the period of limitation. This Court is left with no choice but to set aside the impugned orders dated 12th July, 2019 and remand the matters back to the learned Trial Court to consider the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent by the petitioner dated 26th October, 2015, that the fixed assets could not be shown on account of a scanning error, was found to be not satisfactory. Thereafter, the sanction from the Regional Director for the prosecution was obtained on 27th December, 2017, whereafter, a show cause notice dated 24th August, 2018 was sent to the petitioner. Since the response was not satisfactory, the complaint was filed. 5. In CRL.M.C. 782/2020, the complaint was filed when on scrutiny it was found that the Balance Sheet, Profit and Loss Account for the year ending 31st March, 2013 and 31st March, 2014 had shown Rs.7,500/- and Rs.20,000/- as income from operations, improperly, respectively, without proper disclosures having been made. Scrutiny to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2020), have argued that the offence under Section 211(7) of the Companies Act, 1956 was a continuing offence and, therefore, there was no question of limitation. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of the High Court of Madras in Teledata Technology Solutions Ltd. (A1) and others Vs. Deputy Registrar of Companies, 2022 SCC OnLine Mad 102 in support of this contention. Learned counsel submitted that both the complaints were filed with applications for condonation of delay and when the learned ACMM took cognizance, clearly delay had been condoned, even if the offence was to be treated as not being of a continuing nature. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, as also learned counsel for the respondent, and have als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
