Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2023 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 629 - HC - GSTValidity of Criminal proceedings - Allegation of Abetting mis-utilisation of Input Tax Credit for the wrong figures / amount by two of the Dealers - HELD THAT - The court finds that the basis of filing of the FIR has already been quashed by the Division Bench of this court along with the other cases and the matter has been remitted back to the concerned authority to pass a fresh order, as such, the basis of filing of the FIR has already been quashed, to allow to continue the proceeding will amount to an abuse of the process of law. The entire criminal proceedings, in connection with Bokaro Steel City P.S. Case No. 121 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. No. 663 of 2018, registered for the offence under Sections 409, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 73, 74, 132(1)(e), 132(1)(f), 132(1)(i) and 132(1)(iv) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro, are hereby, quashed. Petition allowed.
Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the quashing of criminal proceedings related to a case under Sections 409, 420, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code along with Sections 73, 74, 132(1)(e), 132(1)(f), 132(1)(i), and 132(1)(iv) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Details of the Judgment: 1. Background of the Case: The petitions sought to quash criminal proceedings related to Bokaro Steel City P.S. Case No. 121 of 2018 involving alleged offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Allegations and FIR Registration: The FIR alleged that the petitioners, as Directors of a company, abetted the misutilization of Input Tax Credit by two dealers during the period when the Goods and Service Tax Act was in effect. The FIR led to the registration of the case under the mentioned sections. 3. Petitioners' Arguments: The petitioners argued that the offenses were not made out against them as only the Commissioner of State Taxes could sanction the prosecution, not the Additional Commissioner. They contended that individuals were not accused, only the company, and cited relevant sections of the GST Act and a previous case to support their stance. 4. Division Bench Judgment: The petitioners referred to a previous judgment by a Division Bench quashing demand and assessment orders related to the same matter, indicating that the basis of the FIR had already been quashed by the higher court. 5. Court's Decision: Considering the quashing of the basis of the FIR by the Division Bench, the court found that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would amount to an abuse of the legal process. Therefore, the court quashed the entire criminal proceedings related to the case. 6. Future Action: The court mentioned that if after a fresh assessment a new cause of action arises, the State could take appropriate legal steps. All the petitions were allowed and disposed of, with any pending applications also being disposed of. This summary provides a detailed overview of the judgment, highlighting the key arguments, decisions, and legal aspects involved in the case.
|