2023 (1) TMI 240 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of bail - evasion of tax - compoundable offences or not - Section(s) 132(1)(B) (C) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - In present case, the petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2022, charge-sheet has been filed on 30.09.2022 and he has already deposited about 10 per cent of the amount of alleged evaded tax duty. In view thereof; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Khem Chand Thathera S/o Shri Nanagram Thathera shall be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with afore-mentioned FIR registered at concerned Police Station, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court with the stipulation that he shall comply with all the conditions laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with a case under the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with a case registered under the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, highlighting the lack of notice for adjudication of tax liability as required by Sections 73 & 74 of the Act. The petitioner had been in custody since 01.08.2022, with a charge-sheet filed on 30.09.2022. He had already deposited 10% of the alleged evaded tax amount. The petitioner, citing a Supreme Court judgment, requested bail due to the compoundable nature of the offenses, absence of criminal antecedents, and the maximum punishment being five years.

The respondent opposed the bail application, emphasizing the substantial allegation of tax evasion amounting to Rs. 20.83 Cr against the petitioner. Relying on various judgments, the respondent argued for the dismissal of the bail application. The court considered the arguments presented by both parties.

The court referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment in the case of Ratnambar Kaushik, which emphasized the need to avoid prejudicing the trial by discussing merits at the bail stage. Considering the petitioner's incarceration since August 2022, completion of trial duration, and nature of evidence being primarily documentary and electronic, the court found it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner. The court directed the petitioner to comply with specified conditions, including depositing his passport with the trial court and participating diligently in the trial.

In light of the circumstances, the court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the accused-petitioner on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties as specified. The petitioner was further directed to deposit his passport with the trial court and seek permission before traveling abroad. The court's decision was based on the petitioner's prolonged custody, deposition of a portion of the evaded tax amount, and the nature of evidence expected in the trial.