<?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>2021 (8) TMI 1004 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411426</link>
    <description>Goods-supply allegations, non-payment, and investigation material including warehouse records, vehicle and driver statements, and GST communications showing input tax credit against the invoices supported a prima facie prosecution case. The Court held that this material could not be brushed aside at the pre-arrest bail stage and that the documentary and corroborative evidence did not justify anticipatory protection. Pre-arrest bail was therefore declined and the application rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=653889" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 1004 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411426</link>
      <description>Goods-supply allegations, non-payment, and investigation material including warehouse records, vehicle and driver statements, and GST communications showing input tax credit against the invoices supported a prima facie prosecution case. The Court held that this material could not be brushed aside at the pre-arrest bail stage and that the documentary and corroborative evidence did not justify anticipatory protection. Pre-arrest bail was therefore declined and the application rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411426</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>