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>High Court Grants Relief in Tax Dispute, Directs Applicant to Appear and Apply for Bail Under Section 482 CrPC</h1> <h3>M/s Amazing Security Services Pvt Ltd And Another Versus State of U.P. and Another</h3> HC allowed application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. involving tax dispute. Court directed applicant to appear before trial court within two weeks, apply for ... Seeking quashing of the summoning order and order issuing non-bailable warrant against the applicant - Sections 89, 83 of Finance Act, 1944, Section 174 of CGST Act, 2017 and Section 9 r/w Section 9(AA) of Central Excise Act, 1944 - tax liability on the services provided by the applicant herein between April, 2014 and June, 2017 to the educational institutions - HELD THAT:- Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case in all its ramification and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the instant application is disposed of, subject to fulfilment of conditions imposed. Bail application allowed. The High Court of Allahabad, with Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta presiding, heard an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a summoning order and a non-bailable warrant against the applicant in Complaint Case No. 77625 of 2022. The dispute revolves around tax liability on services provided by the applicant to educational institutions between April 2014 and June 2017. The applicant claims that the services provided during this period were exempt from service tax. The Adjudicating Authority raised a demand of Rs. 6,69,58,967/-, which the applicant partially paid under protest. The applicant applied for settlement under the 'Sabka Vikas Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019,' which is still pending. The complaint case was filed by the opposite party despite the pending settlement application. The applicant seeks to contest the case through a pleader due to the nature of the offenses being accounting disputes. The applicant is willing to cooperate with the trial but requests exemption from personal appearance based on Supreme Court judgments. The court directed the applicant to appear before the trial court within two weeks, apply for bail, and allowed for appearance through a pleader. The trial court is to proceed with the case as per law, and the non-bailable warrants were kept in abeyance for two weeks.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
