Service of notice and a subsequent order under the Act were...

Service of notice and a subsequent order under the Act were treated as sufficient to set criminal proceedings in motion for wilful failure to deposit tax deducted at source under Section 276B. The High Court held that due service had been established, and the applicants could not resist prosecution by claiming ignorance when continued non-compliance after notice disclosed a prima facie case of wilful default. The objection of non-service was treated as a disputed factual issue for trial, not a ground for quashing in inherent jurisdiction. The fact that the offence was compoundable did not justify termination of the prosecution absent settlement. The applications for quashing were dismissed.