Penalty u/s 383(1A) of the Companies Act, 1956 - the company did ...

Court Criticizes Penalty u/s 383(1A) of Companies Act for Lack of Evidence and Negligence in Proceedings.

August 7, 2020

Case Laws Companies Law HC

Penalty u/s 383(1A) of the Companies Act, 1956 - the company did not have a Whole-time secretary - non-application of mind - order passed only on the basis of a bare complaint without any supporting documents - It is not a case of inadvertence but rather sheer continued negligence which has caused serious failure and prejudice to the petitioners - The application of mind at the time of taking cognizance and framing of notice is sine qua non. - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 383(1A) of the Companies Act, 1956 - the company did ...

Court Criticizes Penalty u/s 383(1A) of Companies Act for Lack of Evidence and Negligence in Proceedings.

August 7, 2020

Case Laws Companies Law HC

You may also like:

Revision u/s 263 - penalty proceedings u/s 271AAB(1A) - The mandate under section 263 of the Act do not give any power to CIT to impose his satisfaction over the...

Levy of penalty - Applicability of the substituted rule for imposition of penalty - The Supreme Court sided with the appellant, holding that the substituted rule from...

Dishonour of Cheque - Effect of arbitration proceedings - The High Court referred to a Supreme Court judgment which clarified that arbitration proceedings and...

The legality and validity of the termination of arbitral proceedings u/s 32(2)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The Supreme Court found no evidence of...

Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271C and the limitation period for levying such penalty. The key points are: The penalty proceedings were initiated on the date of...

Dishonor of Cheque - Ascertaining nature of transaction - whether a criminal proceeding can be initiated and an accused held guilty when there is already a civil court...

Arbitral Proceedings - Computation of one-year period for completing the proceedings - exclusion of days during which the proceedings were stayed - The High Court...

The High Court correctly distinguished between the jurisdiction vested in every person or public office and the District Registrar in determining penalty on...

Demand of additional tax on simple processing of income - Applicability of provision of Section 143(1A) where assessment may have been completed u/s 143(3) - The High...

The High Court considered the legality of a penalty imposed u/s 31(3) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981, due to the want of Form 28B. The issue was whether the defendants...

Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - It cannot be said that assessee has concealed the particular income with the meaning of section 271(1)(c) of the Act or there is not deep...

Monetary limit for filing of appeal by revenue in case of penalty - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on bogus purchases - Quantum proceedings and penalty proceedings are...

The assessee challenged the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) for short credit of sale consideration received from the sale of copyrights and cable rights. The issue...

The Rajasthan High Court considered a case involving the detention of goods due to an expired e-way bill, raising concerns about tax evasion. Citing a judgment from the...

Benami Property Transactions - Real/original owner - provisional attachment order issued u/s 24(3) of the Benami Transactions Act, 1988 - The High Court found in favor...

Quick Updates: