https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412525 Bail was granted in a prosecution under Section 132(1)(i) of the Assam GST Act, 2017 after the investigation was complete and the offence report had been filed. The Court treated the alleged tax evasion as an economic offence, but found no material showing a need for further custodial interrogation, or any real risk of abscondence or tampering with evidence. It also noted that the accused had already remained in custody for 65 days during investigation. On those facts, and subject to suitable conditions, the petitioner was held entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the allegation. en-us Wed, 15 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Mar 2025 10:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412525 Bail was granted in a prosecution under Section 132(1)(i) of the Assam GST Act, 2017 after the investigation was complete and the offence report had been filed. The Court treated the alleged tax evasion as an economic offence, but found no material showing a need for further custodial interrogation, or any real risk of abscondence or tampering with evidence. It also noted that the accused had already remained in custody for 65 days during investigation. On those facts, and subject to suitable conditions, the petitioner was held entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the allegation. Case-Laws GST Wed, 15 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412525