Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Sri Kunnasagaran Chinniah, S/o. Sri Riaki Chinniah Versus The Income-Tax Department By Income Tax Officer (TDS) , Office Of The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)

2015 (10) TMI 2311 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Offences punishable under Section 276B r/w. Section 278B - failure to remit TDS in respect of various payments made by the Company - Held that:- There is no dispute to the fact that the petitioner herein is a non-Executive Director of the Company. In the entire complaint there is no averment to the effect as to how this petitioner was involved directly or indirectly in the commission of the offences.

It is the established position of law that there is no concept of vicarious liability .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

7 of 2015 - Dated:- 1-10-2015 - Rathnakala, J. For the Petitioner : Sri Udaya Holla, Sr Adv for Sri Aditya V Bhat & Sri Shravanth Arya Tandra, Adv For the Respondent : Sri Jeevan J Neeralagi, Adv ORDER The petitioner herein is arraigned as accused No.5 in the complaint filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. by the first respondent / Income Tax Department in respect of the offences punishable under Section 276B r/w. Section 278B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as (the Act ). 2. O .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ioner submits that the petitioner herein is the non-executive Director of the Company by name M/s.Reid & Taylor (India) Limited. He is nominated to the present Company by a Company / Indivest Pte. Limited, which has shares in M/s.Reid & Taylor. That being so, he has no role to play either in administration or management control of M/s.Reid & Taylor (India) Limited. The complainant in his complaint has alleged that accused Nos.2 to 4 are the Managing Directors who have been treated as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submits that it is only a person, who at the time of the offence alleged to have committed, was in charge and responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company, who shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence, liable for prosecution, the offence alleged in the complaint and no offence is made out against the petitioneris not attracted in this case and prays to quash the entire criminal prosecution against him may be quashed. 5. In reply, Sri Jeevan J.Neeralagi, learned Counsel for the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version