2024 (1) TMI 125 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of bail - offence alleged is triable by magistrate, as per Section 134 of CGST/RGST Act and charge-sheet already filed - power of Commissioner (GST) to compound the offence under Section 137 of CGST/RGST Act - HELD THAT - Considering that matter is triable by magistrate; that applicant has no criminal antecedents; that charge-sheet has been filed; that offence alleged is compoundable in nature; that co-accused is enlarged on bail, and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record, but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the present bail application. It is ordered that accused-applicant Sandeep Singhal S/o Shri Shiv Shankar shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so - the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the accused-applicant arrested under Section 132(1)(c)(f) of the CGST Act, 2017.

Summary:

Issue 1: Bail Application
The accused-applicant, with no criminal antecedents, was arrested in connection with a case registered at the Directorate General of Goods & Services Tax Intelligence. The applicant claimed innocence, stating the offence is triable by a magistrate under Section 134 of CGST/RGST Act and that the Commissioner is empowered to compound the offence under Section 137. Noting that all witnesses are government officials and another co-accused has been granted bail, the court allowed the bail application.

Issue 2: Arguments
The Revenue opposed the bail application, alleging tax evasion of approximately Rs. 11 crores by the applicant. They argued that white-collar financial crimes harm the country's financial health. The Revenue distinguished the case from that of the co-accused who had been granted bail, citing different circumstances. Despite the Revenue's opposition, the court considered the applicant's lack of criminal history, the compoundable nature of the offence, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the bail granted to the co-accused, leading to the approval of the bail application.

Conclusion
After considering the arguments from both sides and the circumstances of the case, the court granted bail to the accused-applicant, subject to furnishing a personal bond and sureties for his appearance before the trial court. The decision was made without delving into the merits or demerits of the case, solely based on the presented facts and circumstances.