https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398616 The Court disposed of the application challenging the order granting anticipatory bail without notice to the Department. The Court found that the order granting bail lacked jurisdiction and should have been heard by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the Additional Sessions Judge at Patiala House Courts in Delhi. The Court considered the ongoing investigation into potential tax evasion by the respondent and the jurisdictional issues, ultimately issuing notice to the respondents for a thorough consideration of the legal aspects involved. en-us Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Sep 2020 22:40:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398616 The Court disposed of the application challenging the order granting anticipatory bail without notice to the Department. The Court found that the order granting bail lacked jurisdiction and should have been heard by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the Additional Sessions Judge at Patiala House Courts in Delhi. The Court considered the ongoing investigation into potential tax evasion by the respondent and the jurisdictional issues, ultimately issuing notice to the respondents for a thorough consideration of the legal aspects involved. Case-Laws GST Wed, 16 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398616