2018 (7) TMI 1745 - HC - GST

Bail application - grounds taken for relaxation is that the condition enshrined in the order is very severe condition and next impossible for the petitioner to comply with the condition - Held that - The provisions as shown to this are undoubtedly very very stringent nittigrity of laws of the provision in this Act - even the provision under Sub- Section (2) of Section 138 which deals with compoinding of offences, is also very stringent. It appears that the allegation against the petitioner Sanjay Kumar Bhawalka is that of evasion of ₹ 27 crore as of now, similarly, the evasion of GST as alleged against Neeraj Jain is a sum of ₹ 12 crore. Therefore, the condition for enlargement of bail to the petitioner on deposit of ₹ 39 crore to the Government Exchaquer through the competent authority is modified to the extent that Sanjay Kumar Bhuwalka the petitioner on condition shall deposit 50% of the evaded amount of ₹ 27 crore - Similarly, the petitioner Neeraj Jain would deposit ₹ 6 crore being the 50% of evaded amount of ₹ 12 crore as a condition to obtain bail - also, the condition of furnishing bond be modified to the sum of ₹ 10 lakh each which can be furnished by way of personal bond to be executed by the petitioners. Bail applications disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Application for relaxation and/or modification and/or waiver of conditions of bail

The judgment delivered by the High Court of Calcutta pertains to an application for relaxation, modification, or waiver of bail conditions granted to the petitioner in connection with a case arising under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The original bail order required the petitioner to furnish a bond of ?50 lakh and deposit ?39 crore to the Government Exchequer. The petitioner sought relaxation, arguing that the conditions were severe and impossible to comply with. The petitioner's counsel referred to Section 158 of the Act, highlighting the provision for compounding offenses, while the Union of India's counsel pointed out Sections 49 and 74 of the Act, emphasizing the determination of tax and prosecution for criminal offenses under Section 132 of the Act.

The court acknowledged the stringent provisions of the Act and considered the investigating agency's allegations that the petitioner and another individual had evaded significant amounts of GST. In light of this, the court modified the bail condition, requiring the petitioner to deposit 50% of the evaded amount as a condition to obtain bail. Additionally, the court addressed the issue of furnishing a bond, noting the unavailability of suitable sureties in the region. Consequently, the court reduced the bond amount to ?10 lakh each, to be executed by way of a personal bond by the petitioners.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the applications for relaxation and modification of bail conditions, ordering the petitioners to furnish a personal recognition bond of ?10 lakh each and deposit 50% of the evaded amounts as discussed. The overall conditions for bail remained subject to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah.