9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 352X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicant may tamper with the evidence and interfere in the investigation. So far as another ground raised by the learned advocate for the applicant on the point that if the ITC availed by the applicant is calculated year wise, then offence is bailable as it falls within the category of Rs.500 lakhs, is concerned, if this submission is accepted at it is, then application is not maintainable if the offence is bailable. It is clear that calculation of the tax under Chapter XII is distinct from the Chapter XIX, which relates to offence and penalties. Therefore, there is no substance in the argument advanced by the learned advocate for the applicant. Considering the nature of offence involvement of the applicant, this is not a fit case to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses was used only for the purpose of office. Thereafter, on 04/1/2020, officer of respondent visited the godown at Kalamboli. Many of the E-way bills were generated from said godown. At the time of visit to the godown, there was no stock in the said godown. Licensor of the godown informed that said firm never stored their goods at the premises. It was used for address. Further, during subsequent investigation, 14 of the suppliers of the firm were found to be non existent. Said firm availed ITC over Rs.5.24 Crores and details are also given in the say of the prosecution. Applicant failed to produce copies of Eway bills, delivery challans, transporters details etc till date and instead of compliance with the summons issued on 05/01/2022, 06/0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax is year wise under Chapter XII of CGST Act. However, offence under Chapter XIX of CGST Act is different and both cannot be connected to each other. On this point, he placed his reliance on the judgment delivered by our Hon ble High Court in the matter of Ashok Kumar and Ors. V/s. Commissioner CGST Central Excise, Navi Mumbai Commissionerate and Ors. reported in MANU/MH/1002/2020 . Both requested to reject the application. 6. After hearing both the sides, I have gone through the record. Matter is at the investigation stage. Apparently, as per say of the respondent, officer of respondent visited the office of suppliers of the firm of the applicant. However, those suppliers are not in existence. This apparently shows that the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
