Permanent Establishment and Business Connection: foreign consultancy receipts not attributable where no fixed base or corporate veil piercing establis...
Limitation period commencement and procedural inquiry rules: identity-based limitation upheld; complaints by authorised public servants need not attra...
In a prosecution under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the High Court held that pre-trial custody must remain exceptional because liberty cannot be curtailed on a punitive basis before conviction. Bail was granted after noting that the maximum sentence was five years, the matter was triable by a Magistrate, investigation was complete, complaint had been filed, there was no criminal antecedent or material showing risk of tampering, intimidation, flight, or non-cooperation, and the case was largely documentary. The Court also considered that charge had not been framed and trial was unlikely to conclude soon, so continued detention would amount to punitive custody rather than securing the trial.
In a prosecution under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the High Court held that pre-trial custody must remain exceptional because liberty cannot be curtailed on a punitive basis before conviction. Bail was granted after noting that the maximum sentence was five years, the matter was triable by a Magistrate, investigation was complete, complaint had been filed, there was no criminal antecedent or material showing risk of tampering, intimidation, flight, or non-cooperation, and the case was largely documentary. The Court also considered that charge had not been framed and trial was unlikely to conclude soon, so continued detention would amount to punitive custody rather than securing the trial.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
