CA Sandeep Kanoi
While Bombay HC has refused to grant bail application pending payment of Service tax for service tax evasion for the period starting before 10.05.2013 in the case of Kandra Rameshbabu Naidu but on the other hand Kolkutta High Court in the case of Sudip Das granted to bail to accused who had been charged for commission of offence punishable under Section 89(1)(d) of the Finance Act, 1994.
Hon’ble Kolkutta HC further held that It is correct that the offence is alive till now but it is not less than correct that when it was originated, the offence was bailable in view of the observation made by the Hon’ble Apex Court. It is also reckoned that the new Act does not have any retrospective effect.
If this be so, the question of bailability and non-bailability almost comes to a point of merger, the benefit of which should be extended to the accused person. Be that as it may, on the following terms and conditions, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner:-
i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.30,000/-, with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, North 24-Parganas, Barasat.
Paid content
Author Info
Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.
CESTAT Kolkata Quashes ₹53.88 Crore Service Tax on Odisha Liquor Licence Fees
October 5, 2026Extended Limitation Invalid for Retrospective Service Tax on Renting of Property: CESTAT Kolkata
October 5, 2026
CESTAT Chennai: Builder’s Pre-July 2010 Works Contract Service Tax Demand Quashed
October 5, 2026
CESTAT Ahmedabad: Delayed Sale Payment Interest Not Taxable as Tolerating Act Service
October 5, 2026
Pre-July 2010 Residential Construction Service Tax Demand Set Aside: CESTAT Hyderabad
October 2, 2026
