<?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>2022 (7) TMI 295 - DISTRICT COURT GURUGRAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424740</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail under GST inquiry proceedings was treated as premature where summons had been issued under Section 70 for appearance and production of records, but no arrest had yet been proposed or approved. The court reasoned that, at an initial investigative stage, a speculative fear of arrest did not justify pre-arrest protection, especially where the applicant had not cooperated with the inquiry. It further noted that any necessary information about arrest approval could be sought if arrest was later contemplated, and that the statutory inquiry should not be obstructed. Pre-arrest protection was therefore refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 14:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684256" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 295 - DISTRICT COURT GURUGRAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424740</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail under GST inquiry proceedings was treated as premature where summons had been issued under Section 70 for appearance and production of records, but no arrest had yet been proposed or approved. The court reasoned that, at an initial investigative stage, a speculative fear of arrest did not justify pre-arrest protection, especially where the applicant had not cooperated with the inquiry. It further noted that any necessary information about arrest approval could be sought if arrest was later contemplated, and that the statutory inquiry should not be obstructed. Pre-arrest protection was therefore refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424740</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>