Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The DSC refused bail to Accused A in a prosecution under Sections 132(1)(b), (c) and (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, arising from an alleged large-scale fraudulent generation, claim and transmission of Input Tax Credit and refund claims approximating Rs.29.81 crore through nongenuine supplier firms. The court found material indicating fabrication of firms, misuse of identity documents, filing of a refund application on behalf of Firm X without authorization, abscondence to the USA, recurrent change of residence and alteration of personal identifiers, and earlier proclamation as a fugitive, collectively demonstrating strong grounds to believe culpability and high flight risk. In view of the gravity of the economic offence and governing precedents, bail was denied.
The DSC refused bail to Accused A in a prosecution under Sections 132(1)(b), (c) and (i) of the CGST Act, 2017, arising from an alleged large-scale fraudulent generation, claim and transmission of Input Tax Credit and refund claims approximating Rs.29.81 crore through nongenuine supplier firms. The court found material indicating fabrication of firms, misuse of identity documents, filing of a refund application on behalf of Firm X without authorization, abscondence to the USA, recurrent change of residence and alteration of personal identifiers, and earlier proclamation as a fugitive, collectively demonstrating strong grounds to believe culpability and high flight risk. In view of the gravity of the economic offence and governing precedents, bail was denied.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.