The Petitioner has availed bogus ITC worth of Rs. 9.35 crores without physical receipt of goods on the strength of fake invoices obtained in the name of fake and non-existent firms, accordingly this court is not inclined to accept the present move for grant of bail to the Petitioner.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail — The petitioner sought bail in the case registered under section 132 (1)(b)(c) and (1) of the Act, 2017. The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the complaint contains the allegations that the Petitioner in collusion with others managed in showing the receipt of purchase invoices in the name of fake firms without physical receipt of goods and issuing sale invoices without onward physical movement of the goods and has wrongfully availed and passed on bogus ITC on the strength of those fake invoices in defrauding the State exchequer. The Petitioner has remained in custody since 28.06.2021 and now his release on bail would cause no hindrance on the path of a free and fair investigation more particularly when complaint has already been filed in the Court. It was submitted that the Petitioner being a permanent resident of Bhubaneswar. The Authority having seized the relevant documents; the questions of tampering the evidence by the Petitioner and thereby influencing the trial do not arise. The court observed that the complaint alleges that the Petitioner has availed bogus ITC of Rs. 9.35 crores without physical receipt of goods on the strength of fake invoices and passed on bogus ITC worth Rs. 9.65 cores without the supply of goods in the reality. Dubious roles alleged to have been played by the Petitioner stand in the direction of making hefty unlawful and unimaginable financial gain
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the bail application.
The Petitioner has availed bogus ITC worth of Rs. 9.35 crores without physical receipt of goods on the strength of fake invoices obtained in the name of fake and non-existent firms, accordingly this court is not inclined to accept the present move for grant of bail to the Petitioner.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail — The petitioner sought bail in the case registered under section 132 (1)(b)(c) and (1) of the Act, 2017. The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the complaint contains the allegations that the Petitioner in collusion with others managed in showing the receipt of purchase invoices in the name of fake firms without physical receipt of goods and issuing sale invoices without onward physical movement of the goods and has wrongfully availed and passed on bogus ITC on the strength of those fake invoices in defrauding the State exchequer. The Petitioner has remained in custody since 28.06.2021 and now his release on bail would cause no hindrance on the path of a free and fair investigation more particularly when complaint has already been filed in the Court. It was submitted that the Petitioner being a permanent resident of Bhubaneswar. The Authority having seized the relevant documents; the questions of tampering the evidence by the Petitioner and thereby influencing the trial do not arise. The court observed that the complaint alleges that the Petitioner has availed bogus ITC of Rs. 9.35 crores without physical receipt of goods on the strength of fake invoices and passed on bogus ITC worth Rs. 9.65 cores without the supply of goods in the reality. Dubious roles alleged to have been played by the Petitioner stand in the direction of making hefty unlawful and unimaginable financial gain
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the bail application.