Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (2) TMI 1573

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gistered premises of M/s Sri Ram Industries (GSTIN07AGUPA1568K1ZI), at New Delhi on 19.04.2018. The said premises was found closed. On enquiry from the person available in close vicinity, it was revealed that the said premises was closed for the last five years. It was further found that the premises was controlled/used by Vinay Kumar Gupta, Director of M/s MICA Industries having its office at A-36, Ist Floor, Rajouri Garden, Delhi. The officers conducted the search at A-36, 1st Floor, Rajouri Garden, Delhi, in accordance with law on 19.04.2018 which resulted in the recovery and seizure of a large number of incriminating documents indicating evasion of CGST duty. It has been further submitted that the respondent alleged that present applic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Input tax credit was availed of on the basis of fake transactions worth Rs.450 crores. It has been further submitted that on the alleged allegations the officers of Respondent on 19.04.2018 conducted search at various premises of aforesaid business entities. The respondent after completing search recorded statements of proprietors/directors of these business entities. The respondent acting in an arbitrary and unreasonable manner on 08.10.2018 put applicant i.e. Vinod Kumar Agarwal, Proprietor of M/s Sriram Industries under arrest. Learned trial Court sent applicant and others to judicial custody and since then all of them are in judicial custody. It has been further submitted that there is no allegation of generation of or originating of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... her parties to pay output tax. A period of more than one and a half years had expired but till date there is no evidence that applicant facilitated any party to avail ITC without goods and said party utilize ITC for the payment of GST which was payable on actual supply of goods. Nobody can be deprived of his right of personal liberty without specific allegations corroborated by independent evidences. The applicant has been incarcerated for more than one year but till date there is no evidence of evasion of tax and loss of revenue. It has been further submitted that MICA, Satellite, and Galaxy Metal all the four business entities are in existence since 2012-13 and are making sale and purchase with each other and prior to introduction of GST .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted outrightly. It has been further submitted that the provision qua search, seizure, arrest, demand of GST are identical to provisions of erstwhile Central Excise Act, 1944 as well as Finance Act, 1994 (Service Tax). It has been further submitted that the maximum sentence prescribed under Section 132 of CGST Act is five years and the applicant is in custody for last about 15 months. The applicant even without framing of charge has already undergone imprisonment of 14 months, thus there is no reason or justification to continue the applicant in dungeon. The complaint filed by respondent shall be tried as warrant case and even till date pre-charge evidence has not started. Further, it will take long time in conclusion of trial and no usefu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... factum of the case being at par with the co-accused has been admitted by necessary implication. Had it been otherwise, specific case should have been carved out in reply as to what was the difference in role of the petitioner herein and his co-accused, who had been granted the concession of bail by the Hon'ble High Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner herein was just the employee of M/s MICA Industries Limited i.e. the Company owned by the principal accused, who had already been granted the concession of bail by the Hon'ble High Court. Despite the grant of opportunity to the learned Senior Special Public Prosecutor to let this Court know how the role of petitioner herein was graver than that of principal accus .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates