<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1988 (9) TMI 18 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24163</link>
    <description>Pendency of assessment proceedings, including appeal and remand, does not by itself bar criminal prosecution for Income-tax Act offences, and the later completion of assessment may reinforce the prosecution where the complaint rests on false claims, bogus vouchers, and non-existent suppliers. The complaint was not vitiated by the inclusion of deceased persons or nominee directors, because death only affects proceedings on proof and any immunity or absence of responsibility depends on evidence of good faith, control, and due diligence. Individual notices to each accused were not a condition precedent in this company-prosecution framework, so the absence of such notices did not invalidate the prosecution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:08:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (9) TMI 18 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24163</link>
      <description>Pendency of assessment proceedings, including appeal and remand, does not by itself bar criminal prosecution for Income-tax Act offences, and the later completion of assessment may reinforce the prosecution where the complaint rests on false claims, bogus vouchers, and non-existent suppliers. The complaint was not vitiated by the inclusion of deceased persons or nominee directors, because death only affects proceedings on proof and any immunity or absence of responsibility depends on evidence of good faith, control, and due diligence. Individual notices to each accused were not a condition precedent in this company-prosecution framework, so the absence of such notices did not invalidate the prosecution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24163</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>