TMI Blog1952 (3) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cond accused and another who is the son of the first accused are partners of a firm called Behara Lachanna Patnaick and Sons and Kollapalli Chiranjeevi. The firm was doing business for a very long time and the notice of the assessment for the year 1946-47 was served on them on 12th July, 1949. Notice was served on Satyanarayana the son of B.L. Patnaick. Then the first accused and his son Satyanara ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has relied upon the ruling of Subba Rao, J., in The Public Prosecutor v. Jacob Nadar(1). In that case there were two partners but one of them alone was prosecuted for non-payment of the tax. Subba Rao, J., observed that though Jacob might be made liable if the proper procedure had been followed as a partner of the firm-on that question he did not express his final opinion-Jacob was not liable as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the accused only was prosecuted in his personal capacity. These observations will apply with equal force to the facts of this case. Behara Lachanna Patnaick and Sons con- stituted one firm and this firm along with Kollapalli Chiranjeevi constituted another firm which is now assessed and on which tax is levied. To prosecute this firm there are undoubtedly three partners, namely, the first accused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lie within the ruling of Subba Rao, J., in The Public Prosecutor v. Jacob Nadar(1). I must therefore set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner herein who is the first accused. The second accused has not preferred any revision. Under Sections 435 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure I take notice of the case of 2nd accused also. To make the judgment consistent, I must set aside t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
