Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
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 
