In the notice issued under section 2(35) in complaint that assessee was Managing Director of accused company and was responsible for day-to-day business and conduct of accused company.  Assessee filed an application before Trial Court for discharge contending that he was not Managing Director of company and only Director and hence did not fall under section 2(35)(b). Trial Court after considering grounds urged in petition and considering material available on record, allowed application and discharged assessee.  On revision, revenue prayed for setting aside order discharging assessee. Dismissing the petition the Court held that   notice issued to assessee was not in consonance with section 2(35) as there was no specific averment in notice that assessee was in charge of day-to-day affairs of company-Trial Court took note of notice and came to conclusion that assessee was only asked to show cause why prosecution should not be initiated against him for offence punishable under section 276B, but nothing was contained therein with regard to contents of section 2(35),, therefore, Trial Court committed no error in discharging assessee.  (FY. 2016-17)