<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (5) TMI 1756 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287251</link>
    <description>Bail under Section 439 CrPC was granted in a prosecution under the CGST Act after the investigation was completed and the charge-sheet had been filed. The Court treated continued custody as unnecessary at that stage and granted bail without expressing any view on the merits of the allegations concerning bogus firms and fake invoices. The decision is limited to the bail question and does not determine the underlying criminal liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 18:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=609326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1756 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287251</link>
      <description>Bail under Section 439 CrPC was granted in a prosecution under the CGST Act after the investigation was completed and the charge-sheet had been filed. The Court treated continued custody as unnecessary at that stage and granted bail without expressing any view on the merits of the allegations concerning bogus firms and fake invoices. The decision is limited to the bail question and does not determine the underlying criminal liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287251</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>