9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atisfaction of the Trial Court/ Duty Magistrate, further subject to the condition that petitioners will cooperate with the respondents and will join the investigation/ inquiry as and when required by the respondents and will not leave the country without the prior permission of this Court. List these petitions on 11th November, 2021. - BAIL APPLN. 3257/2021 and BAIL APPLN. 3401/2021 - - - Dated:- 30-9-2021 - HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Ramesh Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Shailendra Singh, Mr. Ishaan Jain, Advs. Mr. Saurav Aggarwal, Mr. Ashish Tiwari, Mr. Vibhu Anshuman, Mr. Ananvay Anandvardhan, Ms. Kavya Pahwa, Advs. Respondent Represented by: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a short span of 5 months i.e. from November 2020 to March 2021 M/s. Urja has availed and fraudulently passed on ineligible ITC amounting to ₹17.2 crores to M/s. JGSIPL. 3. It is alleged that thereafter, M/s JGSIPL cleared the goods and services as Solar Power Generating Unit (HSN 8543) attracting GST @5% and by way of Other Support Services (HSN 998599) attracting GST @ 18% utilized the ineligible ITC so availed, at the time of discharging its output tax liability. On searches being conducted at the principal place of business of M/s. Urja at Netaji Subhash Place, no firm at the given address was found. Further, additional place of business of Urja at Peeragarhi was found operational, however no manufacturing activity was being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vailing and utilizing ineligible ITC fraudulently but also passing on the same to other nonexistent firms thereby causing huge revenue loss to the Government exchequer. 6. It is further alleged that M/s. Microlyte Energy Pvt. Ltd. (in short Microlyte) has also shown itself as receiving these goods from various firms, which firms have also been verified and found to be non-existent at their registered premises. Petitioner Krishan Kumar Bansal is the Director of M/s. Microlyte and CFO of M/s. Urja. Krishan Kumar Bansal was appointed Director of M/s. Microlyte in November 2020 and during November 2020 to March 2021 M/s. Microlyte fraudulently claimed ITC of goods and services having value of ₹300 crores approximately and involving ITC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was done in cash without any invoices and the concern was a proprietorship firm and thus the proprietor of the firm was liable, whereas M/s. Urja is a public limited company duly listed. Further, entire transactions are through banks and the claim of the respondent that there were no sales and only paper invoices were created through fake firms is unwarranted because all the firms in which transactions have taken place were duly registered and GST numbers were allotted to them. It is further contended that the entire evidence is documentary in nature as has been noted in the panchnamas. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that the so-called findings arrived at in the complaint could not have been done without an assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be made unless a finding on assessment has been arrived at. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the present case is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court reported as 2016 SCC OonLine Del 4951 MakeMyTrip vs. Union of India, as also of the Bombay High Court in 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 200 Daulat Samirmal Mehta Vs. Union of India followed by Division Bench of Bombay High Court in WP(ST) No.5484/2021 dated 11th March, 2021 titled Sunil Kumar Jha Vs. Union of India. 12. Learned Senior standing counsel for the respondent seriously dispute the contentions raised by learned counsels for the petitioners. He states that while determining that paper invoices were created through fake firms, visits were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
