9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 124 - HC - GSTSeeking grant of anticipatory bail - survey and seizure operations - various incriminating material came on record or not - HELD THAT - The inquiry being conducted by the opposite party authorities, cannot be obstructed and therefore, the applicant may appear pursuant to the summon dated 02.09.2021. It is expected, subject to the cooperation, his arrest may not be enforced unless it is warranted for any cogent reasons. Application disposed off.
Issues: Anticipatory bail application under Section 70 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
Analysis: The judgment delivered by Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh, J., pertains to an anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant in connection with a summons/notice issued under Section 70 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. The applicant, Anmol Bindal, sought anticipatory bail as he was summoned by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Dehradun Regional Unit, in relation to a case involving his father, Anukul Bindal, who was previously arrested and granted bail. The applicant's counsel argued that there was no pending inquiry against the applicant, and his summons was merely to harass the family. On the contrary, the informant's counsel contended that incriminating material suggested the applicant's involvement in running a firm with illegal ITC claims. The informant stressed the necessity of the applicant's presence to facilitate the ongoing inquiry. The court acknowledged the differing submissions and noted the importance of allowing the inquiry to proceed without obstruction. While recognizing the need for the applicant's cooperation, the court disposed of the application with the expectation that the applicant would appear as required by the summon dated 02.09.2021. The judgment emphasized that unless there are compelling reasons, the applicant's arrest should not be enforced, indicating a balanced approach considering the circumstances of the case. In conclusion, the judgment highlights the court's role in balancing the interests of the parties involved in a legal matter, particularly in cases concerning tax laws and investigations. The decision underscores the significance of cooperation in inquiries while also safeguarding individuals from unnecessary harassment or arrest, showcasing a nuanced application of anticipatory bail provisions in the context of tax-related offenses.
|
