9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) read with 137 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 have sought the relief of pre-arrest bail. 2. In ABA No.1498/2020 husband is the applicant, whereas in ABA No.1506/2020 wife is the applicant. They are referred hereinafter as applicants No.1 and 2 respectively. 3. The learned advocate for the applicants Mr. Hirani has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated and that they are likely to be arrested without reasons. Hence, he has prayed to grant anticipatory bail. So far as applicant No.2 is concerned, he claims that she was not involved in the business of the Company. He has further claimed that applicant No.2, in pursuant to the directions given by the court had attended the office of the respondent and co- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n further claimed that on the advise and guidance of applicant No.1 the Company started issuing bogus invoices to various firms /companies without supplying goods. It has been further claimed that during the period of July 2017 to May 2018 the amount of ineligible ITC availed is Rs. 580.23 Crores whereas the amount of ineligible ITC passed on was Rs. 579.76 Crores. 7. Upon perusal of the reply filed by the prosecution and the documents placed on record, it would reveal that prima facie there is force in the allegations made against the applicants. The statement of co-accused Mahesh Kinger speaks volume. Considering these allegations, it can be said that unless the investigation officer gets an opportunity to unearth the facts, he will not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laimed that custodial interrogation with applicant No.2 is not warranted. In this regard, the learned S.P.P. Mr. Pathak has submitted that though applicant No.2 had attended the office of the respondent, but she has not extended co-operation, but the statements given by her state that she has avoided to supply proper information. He has invited my attention to the statement of applicant No.2. Upon perusal of the statement of applicant No.2 it would reveal that she has replied most of the questions by stating that she does not know. She has feigned ignorance about the person who used to look after accounts of the company and the amount of Rs. 21 lacs which was deposited by Vision Rabbit Advisory Pvt. Ltd. in the account maintained with Axis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
