https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169269 A partner who admitted that he alone looked after the firm's affairs was treated as a person in charge and responsible for the conduct of the business for vicarious liability under the penal provision. His absence from the business premises at the time of contravention did not, by itself, negate liability where there was no evidence that he had relinquished control. The conviction was sustained. In review, however, the custodial sentence was moderated in light of the statutory scheme and the circumstances, and rigorous imprisonment was set aside so that the punishment was confined to fine. en-us Tue, 18 Aug 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Oct 2017 16:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169269 A partner who admitted that he alone looked after the firm's affairs was treated as a person in charge and responsible for the conduct of the business for vicarious liability under the penal provision. His absence from the business premises at the time of contravention did not, by itself, negate liability where there was no evidence that he had relinquished control. The conviction was sustained. In review, however, the custodial sentence was moderated in light of the statutory scheme and the circumstances, and rigorous imprisonment was set aside so that the punishment was confined to fine. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 18 Aug 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169269