2019 (2) TMI 740 - HC - GST

Grant of Regular Bail - Section 69 of CGST Act 2017 - bogus billing - incriminating documents found indicating evasion of CGST duty - Held that - In view of the fact there were justifiable grounds to arrest the petitioners under Section 69 of the CGST Act and further in view of the fact that case involves evasion of more than 80 crores of tax under the CGST and offence is punishable with imprisonment for a period of five years and complaint is stated to have already been filed there are no ground to grant benefit of regular bail to the petitioners - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case of arrest made under Section 69 of CGST Act, 2017 involving evasion of tax exceeding &8377; 80 crores.

Analysis:
The petitioners sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. following their arrest by the Director General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, Gurugram Zonal Unit under Section 69 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioners argued that they were taken into custody without assessment by the competent authority, and any assessment made by the respondent could be appealed or compounded. They contended that they were to face trial in the complaint case and emphasized the independence of assessment proceedings from the complaint case. On the other hand, the respondent presented serious allegations against the petitioners, accusing them of engaging in bogus billing and adjusting amounts without actual transactions, resulting in an evasion of over &8377; 80 crores in CGST duty. The respondent highlighted incriminating documents seized during a search, statements recorded from individuals associated with relevant companies, and subsequent investigations conducted.

Upon considering the arguments and evidence presented, the judge found justifiable grounds for the petitioners' arrest under Section 69 of the CGST Act due to the gravity of the offense involving a substantial tax evasion exceeding &8377; 80 crores. The offense carried a punishment of up to five years of imprisonment, and a complaint had already been filed. Given the circumstances and seriousness of the offense, the judge concluded that there were no grounds to grant regular bail to the petitioners. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the judge clarifying that the decision did not reflect an opinion on the case's merits.