TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Anticipatory Bail Denied in Tax Summons Case, Petitioner Directed to Seek Alternative Legal Remedies Under Section 438 Cr.P.C.</h1> <h3>Vemula Yougander Versus Union of India</h3> HC dismissed anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. related to CGST Act summons. Following SC precedent, Court held that anticipatory bail ... Seeking grant of bail - invocation of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the stage of summons - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, no steps were taken by the Department under Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, though the petitioner had been appearing over a period of time. The Honourable Supreme Court in THE STATE OF GUJARAT ETC. VERSUS CHOODAMANI PARMESHWARAN IYER & ANR. ETC. [2023 (7) TMI 1008 - SUPREME COURT] held that at the stage of summons the person summoned cannot invoke Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Criminal Petition is disposed off. Issues: Bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. in connection with summons under Section 70 of CGST Act, 2017Upon hearing both parties, the petitioner sought bail u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. due to the fear of arrest following summons under Section 70 of CGST Act, 2017 for giving evidence and producing documents. The petitioner's counsel highlighted that despite the petitioner's repeated appearances, no action was taken by the Department u/s 69 of CGST Act, 2017. The Supreme Court's ruling in State of Gujarat v. Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer emphasized that during summons under Section 69, anticipatory bail u/s 438 cannot be invoked. The Court reiterated that at the summons stage, Section 438 of Cr.P.C. cannot be utilized. Consequently, the Criminal Petition was disposed of, with the petitioner advised to explore writ jurisdiction if necessary. ConclusionThe High Court, basing its decision on the Supreme Court's ruling, clarified the limitations of seeking anticipatory bail u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. during the summons stage under Section 69 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was guided to consider invoking the writ jurisdiction of the Court for further legal recourse.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
