Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
HC dismissed the petition seeking recall of bail in a fraudulent IGST refund case. The respondent, arrested for allegedly claiming fraudulent tax refund exceeding 63 crores, was granted bail by the MM after careful consideration of facts. The court found no justification to interfere with the bail order, noting that previous prosecutions were primarily for non-appearance under IPC Sections 174, 175, and no formal complaint had been filed. The ASJ had already evaluated the respondent's prior involvement, and the Department failed to demonstrate any improper exercise of judicial discretion. Consequently, the petition challenging the bail order was rejected.
HC dismissed the petition seeking recall of bail in a fraudulent IGST refund case. The respondent, arrested for allegedly claiming fraudulent tax refund exceeding 63 crores, was granted bail by the MM after careful consideration of facts. The court found no justification to interfere with the bail order, noting that previous prosecutions were primarily for non-appearance under IPC Sections 174, 175, and no formal complaint had been filed. The ASJ had already evaluated the respondent's prior involvement, and the Department failed to demonstrate any improper exercise of judicial discretion. Consequently, the petition challenging the bail order was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.