https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763645 The HC held that while the Commissioner has the power under Section 69 of the CGST Act to authorize arrest for specified offences under Section 132, mere availability of this power does not justify detention. The petitioner, accused of evading GST by falsely claiming ITC, cooperated with the investigation and no material indicated risk of absconding or non-compliance. Additionally, no determination of liability had been made at this stage. Consequently, the court found continued detention unnecessary and granted interim bail subject to furnishing personal and surety bonds of Rs. 1 Lakh each and compliance with conditions imposed by the CJM, Kamrup (M). en-us Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763645 The HC held that while the Commissioner has the power under Section 69 of the CGST Act to authorize arrest for specified offences under Section 132, mere availability of this power does not justify detention. The petitioner, accused of evading GST by falsely claiming ITC, cooperated with the investigation and no material indicated risk of absconding or non-compliance. Additionally, no determination of liability had been made at this stage. Consequently, the court found continued detention unnecessary and granted interim bail subject to furnishing personal and surety bonds of Rs. 1 Lakh each and compliance with conditions imposed by the CJM, Kamrup (M). Case-Laws GST Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763645