https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200164 Vicarious prosecution for tax deduction offences requires proof that the accused was, at the time of the offence, in charge of and responsible for the firm's business. Where the department relies on principal-officer liability, a valid notice treating the person as principal officer is necessary. On the facts, the accused was shown only to be an employee, and the materials did not establish responsibility for remitting the deducted tax. The prosecution under sections 276-B and 278-B was therefore not maintainable, and the proceedings were quashed. en-us Fri, 08 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Mar 2018 16:45:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200164 Vicarious prosecution for tax deduction offences requires proof that the accused was, at the time of the offence, in charge of and responsible for the firm's business. Where the department relies on principal-officer liability, a valid notice treating the person as principal officer is necessary. On the facts, the accused was shown only to be an employee, and the materials did not establish responsibility for remitting the deducted tax. The prosecution under sections 276-B and 278-B was therefore not maintainable, and the proceedings were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200164