There had not been any evidence about petitioner’s tampering with the documents or trying to influence the witnesses, observing that mere allegation is not sufficient.
Bail application accepted
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Bail –-- The petitioner challenged the validity of section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the Act, 2017 and sought his enlargement on bail. He was arrested on 23.03.2021. It is alleged that he had not deposited with the government tax collected to the tune of Rs. 6.30 Crores and availed ITC to the tune of Rs. 2 Crores without receipt of goods and services. There is a tax evasion to the tune of Rs. 9.90 Crores. The search was conducted at his premises on 15/10/2020. He has cooperated in the investigation and always responded to and appeared as and when summoned. He has deposited Rs. 45 Lakhs without accepting the liability. The court observed that the petitioner had responded to the summons and attended the dates and there is no justification to arrest the petitioner. There is no evidence that the petitioner is tampering with the documents or trying to influence the witnesses, observing that mere allegation is not sufficient. The petitioner has already paid Rs. 45 Lakhs and would deposit Rs. 5 Crores under protest towards the alleged amount of tax evasion. The petitioner would further deposit amount of Rs. 55 Lakh. Thus, entire aggregate amount of Rs. 6 Crore would be deposited within a period of fortnight which would be under protest and subject to adjudication.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court granted bail to the petitioner on executing a personal bond for an amount of Rs. 50,000/- and subject to certain conditions.