Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The DSC rejected the bail application of the accused proprietor of M/S New Global Scrap Traders, charged under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017, for fraudulent availing and utilization of input tax credit amounting to Rs. 23,47,68,801/- through fake invoices without actual supply of goods. The court found no violation of fundamental rights under Article 22(1) and (2). Given the gravity of the offence, evidence of issuance of bogus invoices, and risk of evidence tampering, witness influence, and flight, the accused was deemed unfit for bail at this stage. The prosecution's case demonstrated substantial material indicating deliberate tax evasion and fraud, justifying continued custodial detention to safeguard the investigation and public interest.
The DSC rejected the bail application of the accused proprietor of M/S New Global Scrap Traders, charged under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(1)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017, for fraudulent availing and utilization of input tax credit amounting to Rs. 23,47,68,801/- through fake invoices without actual supply of goods. The court found no violation of fundamental rights under Article 22(1) and (2). Given the gravity of the offence, evidence of issuance of bogus invoices, and risk of evidence tampering, witness influence, and flight, the accused was deemed unfit for bail at this stage. The prosecution's case demonstrated substantial material indicating deliberate tax evasion and fraud, justifying continued custodial detention to safeguard the investigation and public interest.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
