White collar offences are more serious than offences like murder, dacoity etc. Such offences are committed after hatching conspiracy.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Prosecution – The petitioner prayed for issuance of directions for quashing the illegal proceedings against the Petitioner; staying the proceedings against the petitioner. The Petitioners submitted that as there was allegations of GST liabilities of Rs. 84,00,046/- and the Petitioner deposited this amount under protest. The petitioner challenged the prosecution as it is on wrong conceptions and as the provisions of Sections 154, 157 and 172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not followed. The Respondent submitted that the investigation revealed that fake invoices without receipt or supply of goods or services were prepared for availing ITC and many invoices were issued to petitioner company for which GST of Rs. 84,00,046/- is recoverable. The Petitioners placed reliance on many interim orders made by the High Courts and some orders made by the Supreme Court. The court observed that provisions and scheme of the Act show that separate Chapters are given in the Act for determination of tax not paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed and for offences and penalties. These provisions shall prevail over the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and it cannot be said that all the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure like Sections 154 and 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure need to be followed for prosecution under the Act.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petitions and directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 25,000/-.
White collar offences are more serious than offences like murder, dacoity etc. Such offences are committed after hatching conspiracy.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Prosecution – The petitioner prayed for issuance of directions for quashing the illegal proceedings against the Petitioner; staying the proceedings against the petitioner. The Petitioners submitted that as there was allegations of GST liabilities of Rs. 84,00,046/- and the Petitioner deposited this amount under protest. The petitioner challenged the prosecution as it is on wrong conceptions and as the provisions of Sections 154, 157 and 172 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not followed. The Respondent submitted that the investigation revealed that fake invoices without receipt or supply of goods or services were prepared for availing ITC and many invoices were issued to petitioner company for which GST of Rs. 84,00,046/- is recoverable. The Petitioners placed reliance on many interim orders made by the High Courts and some orders made by the Supreme Court. The court observed that provisions and scheme of the Act show that separate Chapters are given in the Act for determination of tax not paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed and for offences and penalties. These provisions shall prevail over the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and it cannot be said that all the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure like Sections 154 and 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure need to be followed for prosecution under the Act.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petitions and directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 25,000/-.