https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267037 A complaint for offences under the Income-tax Act against a non-executive director was held unsustainable where the pleading did not contain specific averments that he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business, or that the default occurred with his consent, connivance, or neglect. The court treated Section 278B as creating vicarious liability only when its foundational requirements are properly pleaded and shown. In the absence of such material, cognizance could not be maintained against the director, and the consequential criminal proceedings were quashed. en-us Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267037 A complaint for offences under the Income-tax Act against a non-executive director was held unsustainable where the pleading did not contain specific averments that he was in charge of and responsible for the company's business, or that the default occurred with his consent, connivance, or neglect. The court treated Section 278B as creating vicarious liability only when its foundational requirements are properly pleaded and shown. In the absence of such material, cognizance could not be maintained against the director, and the consequential criminal proceedings were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 01 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267037