Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The applicant sought regular bail for allegedly illegally claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) through fake firms without conducting any business or supply of goods, contravening provisions of the CGST Act. Statements recorded u/s 136 of the CGST Act were considered relevant. Evidence showed the applicant operated multiple firms on a single PAN, claiming ITC without actual business operations. Citing the ARNESH KUMAR case, the High Court noted that the applicant's detention was unjustified as investigations were completed and the maximum punishment was five years. The bail application was granted, subject to specified conditions.
The applicant sought regular bail for allegedly illegally claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) through fake firms without conducting any business or supply of goods, contravening provisions of the CGST Act. Statements recorded u/s 136 of the CGST Act were considered relevant. Evidence showed the applicant operated multiple firms on a single PAN, claiming ITC without actual business operations. Citing the ARNESH KUMAR case, the High Court noted that the applicant's detention was unjustified as investigations were completed and the maximum punishment was five years. The bail application was granted, subject to specified conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
