Regular bail refused in GST input tax credit fraud case involving paper firms, missing records, and continuing investigation.

Regular bail was refused in a GST prosecution alleging wrongful passing on of input tax credit through paper firms and invoices without actual supply of goods. The Court relied on material tracing the credit chain to the applicant's proprietary concerns, the alleged non-production of stock registers, purchase invoices and statutory records, and the fact that investigation was still continuing. On those facts, the Court treated the matter as a serious economic offence and declined to exercise discretionary bail powers at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail in a prosecution alleging wrongful passing on of input tax credit through non-existing firms under the goods and services tax regime.

Analysis: The application was considered in light of the allegation that certain concerns existed only on paper and had issued invoices without actual supply of goods, resulting in passing on of inadmissible input tax credit. The material placed on record indicated that the chain of transactions traced the credit to the applicant's proprietary concerns, and the investigating agency asserted that stock registers, purchase invoices, and statutory records were not produced. The Court also noted that the investigation was still continuing and that the accusation involved a serious economic offence. In these circumstances, the Court found no reason to exercise discretionary bail powers in favour of the applicant at that stage.

Conclusion: The applicant was not entitled to regular bail, and the bail application was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The Court declined to release the accused on bail in view of the prima facie case, the alleged paper transactions, and the continuing investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: In a GST prosecution involving a prima facie paper-based invoicing chain and continuing investigation, discretionary regular bail may be refused where the material suggests serious economic misconduct and non-production of statutory records.

---