Section 492 Penalty of Misrepresentation Failure to examine the annual audit account of the relevant year found that the directors' report stated that the number of shares held by the director's two spouses is actually a negative number. In response to the company's showcase notice, the company was issued a showcase notice, in response to which all the directors of the company, acting as a council, misrepresented and acknowledged the violation of section 492 of the Company Ordinance 1984. Of He said that the chief executive requested that he be pardoned as a special case, as it was not done deliberately and assured that this would not happen in the future and the default was set. Was acknowledged, however, in view of the fact that the company had corrected the shareholding pattern. The Directors' Annual Report further assured that the requirements of the law will be complied with in the future, and will be very careful. By default, instead of imposing a maximum penalty according to section 492 of the Companies Ordinance 1984, only the director of the company was fined Rs 100,000. \ R \ n
Related judgments — Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, 2010
