<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (4) TMI 170 - HIGH COURT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2987</link>
    <description>Penalty proceedings under the Income-tax Act do not bar prosecution for concealment or filing a false return, because the penalty and prosecution regimes operate in different fields. The text also notes that a mere possibility of waiver or reduction of penalty does not prevent criminal proceedings. On partner liability, it explains that vicarious criminal responsibility requires material showing that a partner was in charge of and responsible for the business at the relevant time; on the facts discussed, only the managing partner had such material, so the other partners were discharged. The firm, as the entity through which the return was filed, remained liable to face prosecution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Dec 2024 07:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 170 - HIGH COURT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2987</link>
      <description>Penalty proceedings under the Income-tax Act do not bar prosecution for concealment or filing a false return, because the penalty and prosecution regimes operate in different fields. The text also notes that a mere possibility of waiver or reduction of penalty does not prevent criminal proceedings. On partner liability, it explains that vicarious criminal responsibility requires material showing that a partner was in charge of and responsible for the business at the relevant time; on the facts discussed, only the managing partner had such material, so the other partners were discharged. The firm, as the entity through which the return was filed, remained liable to face prosecution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2987</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>