https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18076 The court held that the second accused (partner) is liable for prosecution under section 276B read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act without the need for a notice under section 2(35)(b). The orders of the lower court were set aside, and the cases were directed to proceed in accordance with the law. The court overruled previous judgments that mandated a notice under section 2(35)(b) for prosecuting partners, establishing that such a notice is not a pre-condition for prosecution. en-us Mon, 12 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:47:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18076 The court held that the second accused (partner) is liable for prosecution under section 276B read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act without the need for a notice under section 2(35)(b). The orders of the lower court were set aside, and the cases were directed to proceed in accordance with the law. The court overruled previous judgments that mandated a notice under section 2(35)(b) for prosecuting partners, establishing that such a notice is not a pre-condition for prosecution. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18076