https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381402 A discharge petition in a prosecution for wilful failure to pay tax under the Income-tax Act was rejected because subsequent payment of tax did not by itself negate the prosecution, and the claimed retirement from the firm did not justify interference at the discharge stage. The Court found no infirmity or illegality in the order declining discharge, and held that the partnership reconstitution and the Section 69 Partnership Act plea did not bar continuation of proceedings. The accused were left free to seek compounding before the competent authority if the offence is compoundable, but the prosecution was permitted to proceed. en-us Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jun 2019 17:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381402 A discharge petition in a prosecution for wilful failure to pay tax under the Income-tax Act was rejected because subsequent payment of tax did not by itself negate the prosecution, and the claimed retirement from the firm did not justify interference at the discharge stage. The Court found no infirmity or illegality in the order declining discharge, and held that the partnership reconstitution and the Section 69 Partnership Act plea did not bar continuation of proceedings. The accused were left free to seek compounding before the competent authority if the offence is compoundable, but the prosecution was permitted to proceed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381402