Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
The High Court considered a case involving fraudulent availing and passing on of Input Tax Credit u/s 132(1)(b) & (c) and u/s 132(1)(i) of Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017, through creation of fake firms. After reviewing submissions and material on record, the Court granted bail to the applicants based on the nature of the offence, lack of evidence of fake firm creation devices, and the period spent in jail. The bail application was allowed with imposed conditions.
The High Court considered a case involving fraudulent availing and passing on of Input Tax Credit u/s 132(1)(b) & (c) and u/s 132(1)(i) of Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017, through creation of fake firms. After reviewing submissions and material on record, the Court granted bail to the applicants based on the nature of the offence, lack of evidence of fake firm creation devices, and the period spent in jail. The bail application was allowed with imposed conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
