This Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where bail can be granted in favour of the petitioner.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Bail –– The petitioner /Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.01.2019, sought bail. It is alleged that the petitioner is engaged in the bill trading activity and issuing only GST invoices without supply of goods and availing of ITC without supply of goods in violation of the provisions of Act. The total evasion of tax committed by the petitioner is said to be in the range of nearly 98 crores of rupees. The petitioner counsel submitted that in order to attract the provisions of Section 132(1)(b) of the Act, it is not enough to merely allege that fake invoices has been utilised without supply of goods, and the prosecution must also prima facie produce materials to show that it has lead to a wrongful availment of input tax credit. The court observed that this petitioner is involved in a huge scam of creating fake Companies, creating fake invoices and taking advantage of ITC based on fake invoices. Further, such persons are capable of tampering with the evidence and hamper the further course of investigation. This is not a fit case where bail can be granted in favour of the petitioner.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the Petition.
This Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where bail can be granted in favour of the petitioner.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Bail –– The petitioner /Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.01.2019, sought bail. It is alleged that the petitioner is engaged in the bill trading activity and issuing only GST invoices without supply of goods and availing of ITC without supply of goods in violation of the provisions of Act. The total evasion of tax committed by the petitioner is said to be in the range of nearly 98 crores of rupees. The petitioner counsel submitted that in order to attract the provisions of Section 132(1)(b) of the Act, it is not enough to merely allege that fake invoices has been utilised without supply of goods, and the prosecution must also prima facie produce materials to show that it has lead to a wrongful availment of input tax credit. The court observed that this petitioner is involved in a huge scam of creating fake Companies, creating fake invoices and taking advantage of ITC based on fake invoices. Further, such persons are capable of tampering with the evidence and hamper the further course of investigation. This is not a fit case where bail can be granted in favour of the petitioner.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the Petition.