TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1181
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e application has been filed by the applicant inter alia on the allegation that he is one of the directors of the company - M/s Sun Nirman Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The company was incorporated in the year 2007. However, the applicant was not involved in its incorporation and was not connected with the said company in any manner whatsoever. The applicant purchased certain shareholding in the company and became one of the directors of the company since December, 2011/ January, 2012. It was only after January, 2012 that he stated looking into the affairs of the company. During his tenure, it was always the endeavour of the company to pay service tax on time. However, on account of earlier defaults and on account of business losses suffered by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en filed. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has all the intention to pay all the outstanding dues which is reflected from the fact that initially a payment of Rs. 3 crores was deposited and thereafter a sum of Rs. 87 lac was deposited. Pursuant to the directions of this court, a sum of Rs. 1 crore was deposited. Moreover, the applicant has resigned from the company with effect from 24.02.2014 and requisite Form No.32 was submitted before the Registrar of Companies and, therefore, the liability, if any, is of the company. In any case, the company has assets which are in excess of the amount liability which the respondent no.2 has claimed. Moreover, pursuant to the proceedings under Sections 397 and 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation. He did not appear in compliance to the summons on various dates. An affidavit of Mr R.R. Mittal, Superintendent was filed wherein it was submitted that in compliance of the court's order, a sum of Rs. 1 crore was deposited by the company. On 05.04.2014, they submitted part details and there was outstanding service liability of Rs. 90,83,067/- for the year up to 2013 - 2014. As on date i.e. 13.05.2014, the amount of service tax liability is Rs. 1,01,53,662/-. Another affidavit was filed by Mr R.R. Mittal, Superintendent stating therein that pursuant to the letter of the applicant regarding his resignation, the other director was summoned who informed that the applicant filed hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....India and another v Ashwani Aggarwal [Crl. Appeal No.555/2000] and followed by this court even no notice for service of notice to the arrest of the applicant can be passed. As such, it was submitted that the application is liable to be dismissed. 6. Needless to say, the allegations against the applicant are grave and serious in nature regarding misappropriation of government money. In Ram Narain Popli v CBI 2003 1 AD (Crl.) SC 253 it was observed as under: "The cause of the community deserves better treatment at the hands of the Court in the discharge of its judicial functions. The Community or the State is not a persona non grata whose cause may be treated with disdain. The entire community is aggrieved if economic offenders who ruin th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d and held as under: "Bail applications - anticipatory - respondents summoned under section 108 of the Customs Act - certain directions issued by the High Court to the Customs Authorities that in case the custom authorities find that any non-bailable offence has been committed by the respondents, they shall not be arrested without ten days prior notice - neither of the directions can be said to be legal, valid or in consonance with law. Firstly, the order passed by the High Court is a blanket one as held by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Gurbaksh Singh and seeks to grant protection to respondents in respect of any non-bailable offence. Secondly, it illegally obstructs, interferes and curtails the authority of Custom Officers from....