TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court denies bail in economic offence case citing non-cooperation, seriousness of crime, and public fund protection</h1> <h3>Directorate General of Goods & Services Tax Intelligence & Ors. Versus Rakesh Kumar Goyal</h3> Directorate General of Goods & Services Tax Intelligence & Ors. Versus Rakesh Kumar Goyal - TMI Issues Involved:1. Grant of bail on the ground of parity with co-accused.2. Allegations of fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims.3. Non-cooperation with the investigation.4. Applicability of prior notice and adjudication before arrest.5. Economic offences and their impact on society and economy.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Grant of Bail on the Ground of Parity with Co-accused:The accused's counsel prayed for bail on the ground of parity with co-accused, arguing that the applicant's companies paid the duty amount to suppliers who deposited it with the government, availed input tax credit (ITC) as per GST laws, and discharged tax obligations on imported goods. The counsel cited the Jharkhand High Court's decision in *Nikit Mittal v. State of Jharkhand* granting anticipatory bail upon the accused's undertaking to join the investigation and reverse the fraudulently availed ITC. However, the court noted that the accused failed to cooperate with the investigation, did not provide necessary documents, and did not offer any deposit to the complainant in lieu of GST evasion. The accused's firms were involved in circular trading, creating confusion to avoid tax liability, and passing on ITC without actual manufacturing. Therefore, the ground of parity was not available.2. Allegations of Fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) Claims:The respondent, DGGSI, alleged that the accused's companies availed ITC from companies owned or controlled by the accused himself through circular trading without actual payment of GST. The investigation revealed that the accused's companies issued invoices without corresponding supply of goods, passing on inadmissible ITC of approximately Rs. 61.02 Crores to other companies. The accused's firms were found to be non-existent or not engaged in genuine manufacturing, and vehicles shown for transporting goods were either non-existent or passenger vehicles. The accused's firms were involved in fraudulent ITC claims, causing significant losses to the government exchequer.3. Non-cooperation with the Investigation:The accused was alleged to have failed to join the investigation, provide necessary documents, and record his statement, thereby misleading the investigating agencies. The court emphasized the importance of cooperation in the investigation and noted that the accused did not provide Telly data or any deposit to the complainant. The accused's non-cooperation and the gravity of the offence made the ground of parity with co-accused inapplicable.4. Applicability of Prior Notice and Adjudication before Arrest:The accused's counsel argued that the principle of issuing notice prior to arrest, as upheld by the Supreme Court in *Union of India Vs. Makemytrip (India) Pvt. Ltd.*, should apply. However, the court referred to the Supreme Court's order in *Union of India v. Sapna Jain & Ors.*, which highlighted divergent views among High Courts and clarified that the Telangana High Court's view in *P.V. Ramana Reddy Vs. Union of India* (regarding arrest without prior notice in GST-related offences) should be considered. The Telangana High Court held that fraudulent ITC claims create a huge liability for the government and pose a threat to the implementation of GST law, justifying arrest without prior notice. The court found this applicable to the present case, distinguishing it from the *Makemytrip* case, which dealt with service tax evasion.5. Economic Offences and Their Impact on Society and Economy:The court emphasized that economic offences involving deep-rooted conspiracies and significant public fund losses should be viewed seriously. The Supreme Court in *Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI* stated that economic offences pose a serious threat to the financial health of the country and should be considered grave. The court noted the severe impact of fraudulent ITC claims on the economy, especially during the ongoing pandemic, and the meticulous planning involved in such offences. The accused's non-cooperation and the gravity of the offence justified the denial of bail.Conclusion:The court dismissed the bail application, citing the accused's non-cooperation, the grave nature of the offence, and the significant financial impact on the government. The court found no merit in the ground of parity with co-accused and upheld the applicability of arrest without prior notice in GST-related offences. The detailed analysis and reliance on precedents underscored the seriousness of economic offences and the need for stringent measures to safeguard public funds.
TaxTMI 