https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152381 Prosecution for non-compliance with a sales-tax security-deposit demand addressed to a registered partnership firm cannot proceed against its partners alone unless the firm is also accused. A provision applicable to proprietary businesses operating under trade names does not extend to a registered partnership firm treated as a distinct dealer. The default is completed when the firm fails to comply within the stipulated period, rather than constituting a continuing offence. Cognizance taken after the applicable limitation period is therefore without jurisdiction. The proceeding was liable to be quashed on both grounds. en-us Wed, 14 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jul 2013 17:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152381 Prosecution for non-compliance with a sales-tax security-deposit demand addressed to a registered partnership firm cannot proceed against its partners alone unless the firm is also accused. A provision applicable to proprietary businesses operating under trade names does not extend to a registered partnership firm treated as a distinct dealer. The default is completed when the firm fails to comply within the stipulated period, rather than constituting a continuing offence. Cognizance taken after the applicable limitation period is therefore without jurisdiction. The proceeding was liable to be quashed on both grounds. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 14 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152381