No Arbitration Agreement, No Arbitrator: Supreme Court Voids Award Made Without Municipal Council's Consent, Calls Entire Proceedings "Coram Non Judice" Post-Disposal Miscellaneous Applications Maintainable Only In Rare Situations; Court Becomes Functus Officio After SLP Dismissal: Supreme Court Vague & Omnibus Allegations Against Relatives In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Nipped In The Bud; 7-Year Delay In FIR Fatal: Supreme Court State Can Withdraw Electricity Duty Exemption For Captive Power Plants In Public Interest But Must Give One-Year Notice Period: Supreme Court DSC Personnel Entitled To Second Pension; Shortfall In Service Up To 12 Months Can Be Condoned: Supreme Court Person Professing Christianity Cannot Claim Scheduled Caste Status To Invoke SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Except Matters One May, But Exclude Justice One Cannot: Supreme Court Restores Arbitral Award, Holds State Cannot Be Judge In Its Own Cause On Disputed Breach When State Requisitions Your Vehicle For Elections And It Kills Someone, The State Pays — Not Your Insurer: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Financial Burden Cannot Defeat Constitutional Right to Just Compensation: Supreme Court Unsigned Charge Is A Curable Irregularity, Won't Vitiate Trial Unless 'Failure Of Justice' Is Shown: Supreme Court Tenant Files Fresh Petition Before Rent Authority After Supreme Court Dismisses SLP, Review And Misc Application — Court Calls It "Gross Abuse of Process", Voids Restoration Order Taxation Law | Exemption For Naphtha Depends On 'Intended Use' At Procurement, Not Actual Exclusive Use: Supreme Court Army's Own Grading System Worked Against Women Officers For Years — Supreme Court Grants Permanent Commission, Pension To Short Service Women Officers

Kerala High Court Rejects Bail in ₹6.14 Crore Tax Evasion Case, Citing Seriousness of Allegations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Kerala High Court has denied bail to a petitioner accused of tax evasion amounting to ₹6.14 crores under the Kerala State Goods and Service Act, 2017. The judgment, delivered by Justice Mohammed Nias C.P., has underscored the gravity of the allegations and the importance of continuing the investigation without interference.

The court’s decision was based on a thorough analysis of the case. The petitioner, a wholesale distributor of mobile accessories and electronic items, was alleged to have supplied goods without issuing invoices, thereby evading tax payments dating back to 2018. The arrest followed a raid on the petitioner’s office on November 9, 2023.

One of the key legal points addressed by the court was the timing of the arrest in relation to the assessment proceedings. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the arrest could only occur after the completion of the assessment. However, the court rejected this argument, stating, “The power to arrest under Section 69 can be invoked if the Commissioner has a reason to believe that the person has committed offences that are prescribed and which are punishable under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017.”

The court further emphasized the need to prevent potential tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, stating, “If it is to ensure a proper investigation and prevent the possibility of tampering with evidence or intimidating or influencing the witnesses, the power can certainly be exercised.”

Ultimately, the court found that the allegations of tax evasion, amounting to more than ₹6.5 crores, were serious and warranted a thorough investigation. Therefore, it denied bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Date of Decision: 12th December 2023

BADHA RAM VS INTELLIGENCE OFFICER 

 

Latest Legal News