9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner is involved in a huge scam of creating fake Companies, creating fake invoices and taking advantage of input tax credit based on fake invoices. The respondent till now were able to deduct a total sum of ₹ 98 crores of fraudulent input tax credit which has been passed on/received by 15 bogus Companies. In a case involving moral turpitude of this magnitude, Courts must be very slow and careful before letting out a person on bail. The reason being that such persons are capable of tampering with the evidence and hamper the further course of investigation. Law is now well settled and apart from the other considerations, the Court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support there of, the cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he documentary evidence collected by the respondent and the statements recorded from various persons in this connection clearly indicated that the petitioner has violated the provisions of Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017, [CGST Act 2017-herein after referred as 'the Act ]. The total evasion of tax committed by the petitioner is said to be in the range of nearly 98 crores of rupees. 4. The modus operandi adopted by the petitioner is that there was issue of invoices or bills without supply of goods and services and receipt of invoices without supply of goods and services which is in total violation of the provisions of the Act, leading to wrongful availment or utilisation of input tax credit. 5. Mr. A. Ramesh, learned Senior couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the maximum punishment provided for this offence is for a period of five years, and the Act also makes all the offences compoundable u/s. 138 of the Act, and therefore the intention of the legislature is only the collection of the tax, and punishment can only be taken as a last resort. The learned Senior counsel further submitted that this petitioner has co-operated during the enquiry conducted by the respondent and has also given statements and this petitioner has already suffered incarceration from 26.01.2019 onwards. 8. Mr. N.P. Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that this petitioner is the master mind behind the entire fraud that has been committed in this case. The lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and interfere with the investigation. The learned Special Public Prosecutor submitted that in this case admittedly fake invoices have been used for passing on input tax credit without actual supply of goods, and receipt of such fraudulent input tax credit for the fake Companies floated by the petitioner and the other accused persons. In the light of such serious allegations, this Court should not enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. A detailed counter has been filed by the respondent giving the entire details as to the manner in which the fraudulent transactions have taken place in this case. 11. This Court had an occasion to deal with a case involving an offence under the Act in Mr. Vimal Nayan Others. Vs. The Principal Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken exceeds five hundred lakh rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine; Further as per Section 132(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, the offences specified in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) and punishable under clause(i) of that sub-section shall be cognizable and non-bailable. Further as per Section 69(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, Where the Commissioner has reasons to believe that a person has committed any offence specified in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 132 which is punishable under clause (i) or (ii) of sub-section (1), or sub-section (2) of the said section, he may, by order authorise any officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner has already suffered incarceration for more than 34 days. However, a reading of the entire counter affidavit and the case diary, reveals the fact that this petitioner is involved in a huge scam of creating fake Companies, creating fake invoices and taking advantage of input tax credit based on fake invoices. The respondent till now were able to deduct a total sum of ₹ 98 crores of fraudulent input tax credit which has been passed on/received by 15 bogus Companies. In a case involving moral turpitude of this magnitude, Courts must be very slow and careful before letting out a person on bail. The reason being that such persons are capable of tampering with the evidence and hamper the further course of investigation. Law is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
