<?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 (12) TMI 1264 - CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416498</link>
    <description>Regular bail was refused in a CGST prosecution where investigation disclosed prima facie fraudulent availment and passing on of ineligible input tax credit through fake invoices without movement of goods. The Court treated the alleged conduct as a serious economic offence, relied on witness statements, the applicant&#039;s own statement, and document verification, and found a real risk of destruction of evidence and witness influence while investigation remained ongoing. The challenge to arrest also failed because the material before arrest was held sufficient to satisfy the Commissioner&#039;s reasons to believe, and the arrest authorisation was not vitiated on that ground.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2025 12:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665647" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (12) TMI 1264 - CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416498</link>
      <description>Regular bail was refused in a CGST prosecution where investigation disclosed prima facie fraudulent availment and passing on of ineligible input tax credit through fake invoices without movement of goods. The Court treated the alleged conduct as a serious economic offence, relied on witness statements, the applicant&#039;s own statement, and document verification, and found a real risk of destruction of evidence and witness influence while investigation remained ongoing. The challenge to arrest also failed because the material before arrest was held sufficient to satisfy the Commissioner&#039;s reasons to believe, and the arrest authorisation was not vitiated on that ground.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>