TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner, accused of offences under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: The petitioner had remained in custody for more than six months, the alleged offences carried a maximum punishment of five years, and co-accused persons had already been granted bail. The Court also noted that completion of the proceedings was likely to take time and granted relief without expressing any opinion on the merits.
Conclusion: Bail was granted to the petitioner.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
