In view of the fact that final assessment has not been made under Section 74 of the said Act, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 —Bail – The petitioner filed application under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for bail. Allegation against the petitioner is that he supplied goods and services or both without issue of any invoice with the intention to evade tax. Secondly, he issued all invoices and bills without supply of goods or services or both, leading to wrongful availment or utilization of ITC. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petitioner has already paid Rs. 40 lakhs towards GST. He relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C. Pradeep vs. Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Salem, wherein the Court passed an order in favour of the petitioner on his depositing 10 percent of disputed liabilities. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation of the case. Both the prosecution and the petitioner are directed to sit across the table and beside the amount payable by him towards GST. The respondent counsel filed a statement wherefrom it is ascertained that Rs. 9.10 crores is lying due towards GST Payment.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail of Rs. 5 lakhs with 5 sureties of Rs. 1 lakh each with further condition that within 15 days from the date of his release on bail, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 91 lakhs with the appropriate officer.
In view of the fact that final assessment has not been made under Section 74 of the said Act, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 —Bail – The petitioner filed application under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for bail. Allegation against the petitioner is that he supplied goods and services or both without issue of any invoice with the intention to evade tax. Secondly, he issued all invoices and bills without supply of goods or services or both, leading to wrongful availment or utilization of ITC. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petitioner has already paid Rs. 40 lakhs towards GST. He relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C. Pradeep vs. Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Salem, wherein the Court passed an order in favour of the petitioner on his depositing 10 percent of disputed liabilities. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation of the case. Both the prosecution and the petitioner are directed to sit across the table and beside the amount payable by him towards GST. The respondent counsel filed a statement wherefrom it is ascertained that Rs. 9.10 crores is lying due towards GST Payment.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail of Rs. 5 lakhs with 5 sureties of Rs. 1 lakh each with further condition that within 15 days from the date of his release on bail, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 91 lakhs with the appropriate officer.