https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15411 A conviction cannot rest solely on the statement of a co-accused without independent corroborative material, and the Madras HC treated that principle as fatal to the case against the third and fifth accused, leading to their acquittal. By contrast, the conviction of the second and fourth accused was sustained because they were responsible for the relevant company affairs and gave no satisfactory explanation for the disputed transactions or income particulars. The substantive sentence was nevertheless reduced on mitigating grounds, including the lapse of time and the age of the accused, while the fines were maintained. en-us Thu, 05 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:37:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15411 A conviction cannot rest solely on the statement of a co-accused without independent corroborative material, and the Madras HC treated that principle as fatal to the case against the third and fifth accused, leading to their acquittal. By contrast, the conviction of the second and fourth accused was sustained because they were responsible for the relevant company affairs and gave no satisfactory explanation for the disputed transactions or income particulars. The substantive sentence was nevertheless reduced on mitigating grounds, including the lapse of time and the age of the accused, while the fines were maintained. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 05 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15411