TMI Blog1984 (9) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, in Crl. R.C. No. 84 of 1981, confirming the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, in C.C. No. 858 of 1980, discharging the respondents accused Nos. 7 to 11. The complainant is the petitioner before this court. The petitioner herein, who is the Assistant Registrar of Companies of Tamil Nadu, Madras, has filed a complaint in the court of the Chief Judicial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed the revision holding that respondents-accused Nos. 7 to 11 became directors only from July, 1975, and they were not responsible for the default committed as on April 1, 1975, and confirmed the discharge. Hence, this petition. It is not disputed before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents became directors of the first accused-company only from July, 1975, and they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Supreme Court that such a failure gave rise to a single default and to a single penalty the measure of which, however, is geared up to the time lag between the last date on which the return has to be filed and the date on which it is actually filed. The default, if any committed, is committed on the last date allowed to file the return, the default cannot be one committed every month ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
