9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 803X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e bail to other accused namely Manoj Kumar was granted by the court of Ms. Nidhi Bansal, in another complaint was on account of the fact that he caused loss to State Exchequer for the value less than Rs. 5 crores which was bailable in nature. No ground of parity is available to applicant as his case stands on different footing. However, keeping in view the seriousness of allegations leveled against the applicant in an economic offence,the court is not inclined to grant concession of bail to the applicant. Bail application is dismissed. - BA-4595-2022 - - - Dated:- 7-7-2022 - Shri Tarun Singal, Additional Sessions (Vacation) Judge, Gurugram. Application for regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. Argued by: Shri Ram Narayan Yadav, Counsel for applicant/accused. Shri Deepak, Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by Shri Harpreet Singh, Senior standing counsel on behalf of respondent. ORDER : Vide this order of mine, I shall dispose of an application for grant of regular bail filed by applicant Shamim Akhatar in the aforementioned case. 2. (i) The applicant-accused has come with averments that he has been falsely implicated in the prese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at 04:30 PM at the factory premises for tendering statement and giving evidence, producing documents in connection with the inquiry of M/s. Saba Chemicals Wood Products. The officials of the Respondent Department carried out search and seizure proceedings at the premises of M/s Saba Chemicals Wood Products on 25.04.2022 at 11:30 hrs till 26.04.2022. The order of seizure was prepared by the officials of Respondent Department on 26.04.2022. The search proceedings were carried out in complete derogation of the procedure envisaged in law. The search warrants were not provided/served/ shown to the applicant, rather the officers not only had misbehaved with the applicant and his son but also coerced him to sign certain pre-printed documents without allowing him to even read the documents. The officers of Respondent Department kept the applicant under a constant threat and kept insisting upon payment of tax to which the applicant humbly replied that they never evaded any tax. The documents were seized without proper inventory and without even providing copies thereof. In addition to the abovementioned grave irregularities, the applicant and other employees were interrogated rigorously ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Sh. Manoj Kumar, the Respondent Department has calculated the total quantity of production by M/s Saba Chemicals Wood Products. The applicant never made any such statement that 60.33 kg of Resin is manufactured by using 1 kg of Urea. The composition of Urea as alleged by the Respondent Department for manufacturing liquid Resin is not technically possible as per formula used for manufacturing liquid Resin. As per the chemical composition it is impossible to manufacture 60.33 kg of Liquid Resin only by using 1 Kg of Urea. No incriminating evidence or proor of such sales or manufactured quantity was recovered by the officers of Respondent Department from the premises of M/s Saba Chemicals Wood Products when the search and seizure was carried out by the Department. Therefore, in the absence of any documentary or otherwise reliable evidence, the Respondent Department ought not to be allowed to conjecture and speculate that M/s Saba Chemicals Wood Products has evaded the tax liability of Rs. 22,30,51,232/- under the management and operations of the applicant. Without prejudice to the rights of the applicant, it is submitted that the abovementioned calculations are being presented by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jain Vs. Directorate General of GST Intelligence DGGI Bail Application No. 3771/2021 and CRL.M.A 16552/2021 decided on 26.11.2021 (Delhi). ● Mohsin Salimbhai Qureshi Vs. State of Gujarat R/Criminal Misc. Application NO.91 of 2022 decided on 07.03.2022, Daulat Samimal Mehta versus Union of India through the Secretary and others Writ Petition No.471 of 2021 (2021) 87 GSTR () Bombay decided on 15.02.2021 (Bombay). ● Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.9127 of 2013 decided on 02.07.2014 (Supreme Court) and Vimal Yashwantgiri Goswami versus State of Gujarat R/Criminal Misc. Application No. 4255 of 2022 decided on 28.04.2022 (Gujarat). 6. On issuing notices of the present bail application, the respondent appeared through counsel Shri Harpreet Singh. Reply to the bail application filed, vehemently contesting the same on the grounds that the applicant-accused was arrested on information received by the Officer of Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Gurugram Zonal Unit Indicating that Manoj Kumar, who is proprietor of M/s Harshit Traders and M/s M.S. Khad Store was engaged in clandestine procurement and supply o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (P H) ● Sanjay Dhingra versus Director General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence Criminal Misc-M-50256 of 2019 decided on 23.01.2020. ● PV Ramana Reddy and others vs. Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Dept. of Revenue, WP no. 4764/2019 decided by Hon ble High Court of State of Telangana. 7. I have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have perused the case file very carefully and thoroughly. 8. The allegations against the applicant are that he being the incharge of over all affair of M/s. Saba Chemicals Wood Products was one of the major recipient manufacturer unit, which was procuring agriculture grade urea from Shri Manoj Kumar in cash and further using the same to manufacture and clear taxable goods without payment of GST, thereby evading GST of Rs. 22,30,51,232/-. The said evasion is above Rs. 5 crores thus alleged offence committed is non-bailable. It is question of evidence whether M/s. Saba Chemicals Wood Products evaded that much tax or not and what was the value of urea procured by it from Shri Manoj Kumar. At this stage of the case, the court cannot indulge in mini trial. The allegations leveled against applicant are grave in n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
