<?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 (9) TMI 1105 - PATIALA HOUSE COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428160</link>
    <description>Anticipatory bail was granted in a GST evasion investigation because the material did not directly attribute the alleged clandestine purchases or movement of goods to the applicant. The search yielded no unaccounted stock or raw material, and the Department&#039;s request for custody was mainly to record the applicant&#039;s statement, which was held insufficient to deny pre-arrest bail. The Court also considered the applicant&#039;s serious medical condition, the absence of disputed recovery from the premises, and the limited, compoundable nature of the offence as factors showing that custodial interrogation was not necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2025 13:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691681" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1105 - PATIALA HOUSE COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428160</link>
      <description>Anticipatory bail was granted in a GST evasion investigation because the material did not directly attribute the alleged clandestine purchases or movement of goods to the applicant. The search yielded no unaccounted stock or raw material, and the Department&#039;s request for custody was mainly to record the applicant&#039;s statement, which was held insufficient to deny pre-arrest bail. The Court also considered the applicant&#039;s serious medical condition, the absence of disputed recovery from the premises, and the limited, compoundable nature of the offence as factors showing that custodial interrogation was not necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>