Cheque bounce notice u/s 138 nia

Notice needs to send to alll known Directors as well as to company.

Regards,

ZohebKhatri@gmail.com

The position under Section 141 of the Act can be summarized thus: (i)�If the accused is the Managing Director or a Joint Managing Director, it is not necessary to make an averment in the complaint that he is in charge of, and is responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company. It is sufficient if an averment is made that the accused was the Managing Director or Joint Managing Director at the relevant time. This is because the prefix �Managing� to the word �Director� makes it clear that they were in charge of and are responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company.(ii)��In the case of a Director or an officer of the company who signed the cheque on behalf of the company, there is no need to make a specific averment that he was in charge of and was responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company or make any specific allegation about consent connivance or negligence. The very fact that the dishonoured cheque was signed by him on behalf of the company, would give rise to responsibility under sub-section (2) of Section 141.However it is sufficient if the notice has been served to MD of the company.

The position under Section 141 of the Act can be summarized thus: (i)�If the accused is the Managing Director or a Joint Managing Director, it is not necessary to make an averment in the complaint that he is in charge of, and is responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company. It is sufficient if an averment is made that the accused was the Managing Director or Joint Managing Director at the relevant time. This is because the prefix �Managing� to the word �Director� makes it clear that they were in charge of and are responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company.(ii)��In the case of a Director or an officer of the company who signed the cheque on behalf of the company, there is no need to make a specific averment that he was in charge of and was responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company or make any specific allegation about consent connivance or negligence. The very fact that the dishonoured cheque was signed by him on behalf of the company, would give rise to responsibility under sub-section (2) of Section 141.However it is sufficient if the notice has been served to MD of the company.

can any boyd post about the new circular details about validity of a cheque 3 months does it mean 90 days or more 

Notice will be served to all the direcotrs and the KMPs of the Company. mainly managing direcotr/the manager or the CEO or the signing authority will be held responsible for the same. You can make all the persons party who are displaying on the website of MCA.gov.in

 

Regards,

if notice is served onthe company and the authorised person is engough i think