^®
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 ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

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. |

MOHAMMED YUNUS vs. UNION OF INDIA
(Rajasthan High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

PANKAJ BHANDARI

Pet. Counsel

Vivek Raj Singh Bajwa

Anil Kumar Upman

Res. Counsel

Siddharth Ranka

Petitioner / Applicant	MOHAMMED YUNUS
Respondent	UNION OF INDIA
Court	Rajasthan High Court
State	Rajasthan
Date	Dec 2, 2020
Order No.	S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 14400/2020
Citation	2020(12) TAXREPLY 3578
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
1. Petitioner has filed this third bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. 2. F.I.R. No. DGGI/JZU/INV/GRH/GST/109/2019-20 was registered at Police Station Senior Intelligence Directorate, Jaipur, Zonal Unit, Jaipur for offence under Sections 132(1) of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. It is contended by counsels for the petitioner that sentence provided for the offence is five years. Petitioner has remained in custody for a period of one year. It is contended that in similar type of cases, bail have been granted. It is also argued that the matter is still at the stage of pre-charge evidence. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for Union of India have opposed the bail application. It is contended that petitioner has created 26 firms to facilitate availment and utilization of input Tax Credit to the tune of ₹ 108.36 crores. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for Union of India, I am not inclined....