| Case ID |
e9c0b04e-0bd5-4941-a665-48f8899abdec |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Complaint No. 429 of 1990 |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
Jan 17, 2001 |
| Decision |
The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, challenging the complaint against the petitioner regarding the failure to furnish the income tax return for the assessment year 1988-89. The court found that the allegations in the complaint indicated that the petitioner was exercising control over the company's day-to-day business and thus could not be absolved from responsibility under the Income-tax Act. The court ruled that the non-joining of other directors in the complaint was not relevant at this stage, thereby maintaining the proceedings against the petitioner. |
| Summary |
In this notable case decided by the Delhi High Court, the petitioner, a former director of Ocean Electronics (P.) Ltd., challenged the complaint filed against him under the Income-tax Act for failing to furnish the income tax return for the assessment year 1988-89. The petitioner claimed he was not involved in the company's management and had resigned before the relevant period. However, the court found substantial evidence indicating that he was actively involved in the company's operations at that time. The ruling emphasizes the importance of director accountability in corporate governance, particularly in relation to compliance with tax obligations. This case is significant as it highlights the legal implications for directors under sections 276CC and 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It serves as a crucial reminder for corporate directors about their responsibilities and the potential legal repercussions of non-compliance with statutory requirements. The decision reinforces the principle that directors can be held liable for the acts of the company, ensuring adherence to tax laws. Keywords: corporate governance, director accountability, Income-tax Act, legal implications, compliance. |
| Court |
Delhi High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Ocean Electronics (P.) Ltd.
|
| Judges |
K.S. Gupta, J.
|
| Lawyers |
Vijay Bahuguna,
R.D. Jolly,
Ajay Jha
|
| Petitioners |
|
| Respondents |
State
|
| Citations |
2002 SLD 2768,
(2002) 257 ITR 272
|
| Other Citations |
Municipal Corpn. of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi AIR 1983 SC 67,
State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal AIR 1992 SC 604
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
276CC,
278B
|