9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (2) TMI 798 - HC - GSTSeeking grant of regular bail - Availing irregular ITC - floating seven bogus firms - got GST registrations and opened bank accounts of these firms by using forged and fabricated documents - fraudulently issued invoices without actual movement of goods to avail and pass input tax credit (ITC) for utilization in payment of GST - HELD THAT - There is no dispute that under Section 132 of the CGST Act maximum punishment prescribed is five years and petitioner has already remained in custody for more than 23 months. He was granted interim bail on 22.11.2023 and regularly appearing before the Court below. There is no allegation that in case petitioner is granted bail pending trial, he will misuse the concession in any manner; thus, in such a scenario, sending him in custody at this stage would not serve any purpose. Interim bail granted to the petitioner, vide order dated 22.11.2023, is made absolute. He shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned - Petition allowed.
Issues involved:
Grant of regular bail under Section 439 read with Section 437(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in Criminal Complaint No. COMA-400 of 2019 dated 24.08.2019 under Section 132 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. Judgment Summary: Issue 1: Grant of Regular Bail The petitioner filed a petition seeking regular bail under Section 439 read with Section 437(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in relation to Criminal Complaint No. COMA-400 of 2019 dated 24.08.2019 under Section 132 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. The allegations against the petitioner involved floating seven bogus firms, obtaining GST registrations, opening bank accounts, and issuing fraudulent invoices to avail input tax credit. The petitioner had been granted interim bail previously and had been cooperating with the court. The maximum punishment under Section 132 of the CGST Act is five years, and the petitioner had already spent over 23 months in custody. The court noted that there was no indication of potential misuse of bail by the petitioner. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and made the interim bail granted earlier absolute, requiring the petitioner to furnish bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court. Key Points: - The petitioner had been in custody for over 23 months and had been granted interim bail previously. - There were no allegations of potential misuse of bail by the petitioner. - The maximum punishment under Section 132 of the CGST Act is five years. - The petitioner was required to cooperate fully with the trial court and not seek unnecessary adjournments. - The court clarified that any misuse of the bail concession could lead to a recall of the bail order by the State upon appropriate application. Significant Phrases: - Interim bail made absolute. - Maximum punishment prescribed under Section 132 of the CGST Act. - No misuse of concession of bail by the petitioner. - Cooperation with the trial court without seeking unnecessary adjournments. - Possibility of recall of bail order in case of misuse.
|
