^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes

GST Forms

My Favourites ^New

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Staff Manager ^New

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

BHARAT RAJ PUNJ vs. CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX COMMISSIONERATE, ALWAR ITS INSPECTOR (ANTI EVASION)
(Rajasthan High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

ABHAY CHATURVEDI

Pet. Counsel

P.p. Choudhary

Sanjay Jhanwar

Kunal Jaiman

Res. Counsel

Siddharth Ranka

Petitioner / Applicant	BHARAT RAJ PUNJ
Respondent	CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX COMMISSIONERATE, ALWAR ITS INSPECTOR (ANTI EVASION)
Court	Rajasthan High Court
State	Rajasthan
Date	Dec 6, 2019
Order No.	S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16341/2019
Citation	2019(12) TAXREPLY 1693
Original Order
My Favorites	Add to Fav ☆ Add to favorites.

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
The present Misc bail application under section 439 Cr.P.C. is preferred by the Accused/petitioner in the matter of Complaint Case No. IV(6)78/AE/Alwar/2019/Part-II dated 22.10.2019 registered at Central Goods and Services Tax Commissionerate, Alwar (Raj.) for the offences under Sections 132 (1)(b)(c) & (d) of the Central Goods Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2017’). Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case as no offence under Section 132(1)(b)(c) & (d) of the Act, 2017, is made out. It is further submitted that the Department has invoked the provision of Section 132 of the Act of 2017, without first determining the tax liability and thereby concluded that the petitioner has committed the alleged offence. No show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. The allegations made against the accused petitioner goes to show....