https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755032 In a CGST prosecution alleging fraudulent availment and passing on of input tax credit through invoices without actual supply and shell firms, the Bombay HC considered arrest and bail under Sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act. It noted that investigation was complete, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the alleged offences carried a maximum punishment of five years. Applying the settled approach that custodial necessity must be shown and that arrest should not be mechanical in economic offences, the Court found continued custody unnecessary where further investigation was no longer required. Regular bail was granted. en-us Fri, 28 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 May 2025 16:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755032 In a CGST prosecution alleging fraudulent availment and passing on of input tax credit through invoices without actual supply and shell firms, the Bombay HC considered arrest and bail under Sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act. It noted that investigation was complete, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the alleged offences carried a maximum punishment of five years. Applying the settled approach that custodial necessity must be shown and that arrest should not be mechanical in economic offences, the Court found continued custody unnecessary where further investigation was no longer required. Regular bail was granted. Case-Laws GST Fri, 28 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755032