2022 (5) TMI 1182 - DSC - GST

Seeking grant of Bail - wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit - fake invoices - HELD THAT - This Court is of the considered view that allegations levelled against the applicant/accused are that he issued fake invoices to the tune of Rs. 5.65 crore without the actual supply of goods and all this have been done by the applicant/accused in connivance with the other firms. It is further alleged that there are nearly 56 firms, among whom fake invoices have been exchanged in regard to the amount of Rs. 5.65 crore despite the fact that goods had never been supplied through those invoices. On the basis of said fake invoices tax to the tune of Rs. 5.65 crore has been allegedly evaded by way of claiming the Income Tax Credit. Considering the gravity and the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant/accused and the fact that the investigation of the case is at nascent stage and further considering the fact that now a days economic offences are rampant and should be dealt with due firmness as observed by Hon ble Apex Court in Y.S. JAGAN MOHAN REDDY VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 2013 (5) TMI 896 - SUPREME COURT wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has observed that economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economic of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. Considering the seriousness and nature of the offence allegedly committed by the applicant/accused, this Court is not inclined to grant concession of bail to applicant/accused Saurabh Srivastava - Bail application dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Bail application of accused Saurabh Srivastava under the CGST Act.

Analysis:
The defense argued that the accused was falsely implicated, pressurized to sign blank papers, and that the offense should be bailable due to the amount involved being below the threshold. The prosecution contended that the accused fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit, committed economic offenses, and posed a threat to the country's financial health. The court noted allegations of issuing fake invoices worth Rs. 5.65 crore, evading tax, and the seriousness of economic offenses. Citing a Supreme Court case, the court emphasized the need for a different approach to economic offenses while considering bail applications. Due to the gravity of the accusations, the court denied bail, stressing the severity of economic crimes and the public interest. The bail application of the accused was consequently dismissed, emphasizing the seriousness of the offense and the need to prevent economic threats. The judgment clarified that its decision did not impact the case's merits, ensuring a fair trial process.