https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21341 The court dismissed the revision petition against the petitioners for alleged non-compliance with income tax provisions. The court held that under section 278B of the Income-tax Act, every person connected with the firm's affairs could be held liable for offenses committed by the firm. The court emphasized that the petitioners could not evade liability based on the actions of another individual and that further examination during the evidence recording stage would determine their connection with the firm's affairs. The court concluded that no grounds for interference were established, upholding the liability of the petitioners as partners in the reconstituted firm. en-us Wed, 09 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:53:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21341 The court dismissed the revision petition against the petitioners for alleged non-compliance with income tax provisions. The court held that under section 278B of the Income-tax Act, every person connected with the firm's affairs could be held liable for offenses committed by the firm. The court emphasized that the petitioners could not evade liability based on the actions of another individual and that further examination during the evidence recording stage would determine their connection with the firm's affairs. The court concluded that no grounds for interference were established, upholding the liability of the petitioners as partners in the reconstituted firm. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21341