Provisional attachment under Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires exhaustion of statutory remedies; impugned order set aside, appeal to tribuna...
Restoration of property under Prevention of Money Laundering Act after attachment dispute rendered academic; possession directed to successful resolut...
Goods Transport Agency services via e commerce portals: consignment note creates custody and liability and enables exemption for unregistered recipien...
Reverse charge and assignment of royalty collection: exemption for excess royalty collectors subject to reconciliation; leaseholders remain liable und...
High Court applied section 132 CGST classifications: offences with tax evasion up to five crores are non cognizable and compoundable under section 138, while evasion exceeding five crores is cognizable and non bailable and not compoundable; a five crore deposit against an alleged evasion of Rs. 9,39,79,589/- does not convert the offence into a bailable or compoundable one, so the trial court's analogy is incorrect. The respondent offered to deposit 50% of the alleged evasion and has already deposited five crores; minimal risk of witness tampering and absence of prior misuse of bail led the High Court to dismiss the bail cancellation application.
High Court applied section 132 CGST classifications: offences with tax evasion up to five crores are non cognizable and compoundable under section 138, while evasion exceeding five crores is cognizable and non bailable and not compoundable; a five crore deposit against an alleged evasion of Rs. 9,39,79,589/- does not convert the offence into a bailable or compoundable one, so the trial court's analogy is incorrect. The respondent offered to deposit 50% of the alleged evasion and has already deposited five crores; minimal risk of witness tampering and absence of prior misuse of bail led the High Court to dismiss the bail cancellation application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
