https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447304 The Bombay HC quashed criminal proceedings under sections 276-B and 278-B of the IT Act against a company director. The court held that prosecution of a person as principal officer under section 2(35)(b) requires mandatory service of notice by the Assessing Officer declaring intention to treat him as principal officer. The department failed to serve such notice on the petitioner, despite claiming notices were sent to the company and directors. The court found the magistrate failed to consider statutory requirements before issuing process, violating mandatory procedural safeguards essential for valid prosecution. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447304 The Bombay HC quashed criminal proceedings under sections 276-B and 278-B of the IT Act against a company director. The court held that prosecution of a person as principal officer under section 2(35)(b) requires mandatory service of notice by the Assessing Officer declaring intention to treat him as principal officer. The department failed to serve such notice on the petitioner, despite claiming notices were sent to the company and directors. The court found the magistrate failed to consider statutory requirements before issuing process, violating mandatory procedural safeguards essential for valid prosecution. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447304