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 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.