9911796707
Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Follow us:
|
Home
2020 (6) TMI 792 - HC - GSTSeeking grant of bail - actual owner of firms - petitioners No.1 and 2 have been alleged to be proprietors of the firms - raid was conducted at the house of accused Naveen Jain and the account books etc relating to these firms were recovered from him - HELD THAT - It is pointed out that the petitioners were only employees of Naveen Jain and have been indicted falsely who are facing arrest at the hands of the respondent who had issued summons to them under Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 and it is apprehended that as and when they appear they would be taken into custody in terms of Section 69 of Goods and Service Act 2017. Attention of the Court is drawn to the order in TARUN BASSI VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ORS. 2020 (6) TMI 728 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT wherein a similar provision regarding power of arrest as contained in Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act is under challenge. Notice of motion for 18.08.2020.
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana heard a case where petitioners claimed innocence in connection to firms owned by an accused Naveen Jain. The petitioners, alleged to be proprietors, argued they were only employees and falsely indicted. The court issued a notice for further hearing and ordered that the petitioners should not be arrested if they appear before the Competent Authority.
|
