https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339320 The court denied the application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the potential necessity for custodial interrogation. The court found the involvement of the applicant and his relative in defrauding the state government prima facie evident based on the FIR's accusations. The court highlighted the manipulation of tax payment challans and the discrepancies in tax amounts paid, leading to the rejection of the bail application. The decision was upheld on appeal, emphasizing the likelihood of the applicant's involvement in the fraudulent activities as alleged. en-us Fri, 17 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339320 The court denied the application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the potential necessity for custodial interrogation. The court found the involvement of the applicant and his relative in defrauding the state government prima facie evident based on the FIR's accusations. The court highlighted the manipulation of tax payment challans and the discrepancies in tax amounts paid, leading to the rejection of the bail application. The decision was upheld on appeal, emphasizing the likelihood of the applicant's involvement in the fraudulent activities as alleged. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 17 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339320