https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15567 Criminal prosecution for Income-tax Act offences against firm partners requires a clear foundational averment that they were in charge of and responsible for the firm's business at the time of the alleged offence. Where the complaint and section 200 CrPC statement contain no such specific allegation, the prosecution is vulnerable to quashing under section 482 CrPC. The text also notes that prolonged pendency without evidence after framing of charges may make the proceedings oppressive and inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a speedy trial under Article 21. On these facts, the criminal case and all proceedings against the petitioners were quashed. en-us Tue, 04 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:48:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15567 Criminal prosecution for Income-tax Act offences against firm partners requires a clear foundational averment that they were in charge of and responsible for the firm's business at the time of the alleged offence. Where the complaint and section 200 CrPC statement contain no such specific allegation, the prosecution is vulnerable to quashing under section 482 CrPC. The text also notes that prolonged pendency without evidence after framing of charges may make the proceedings oppressive and inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a speedy trial under Article 21. On these facts, the criminal case and all proceedings against the petitioners were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15567