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 anticipatory bail in tax evasion and corruption case involving Excise officers. Custodial interrogation deemed necessary.</h1> <h3>MANJIT SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB</h3> MANJIT SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB - 2020 (43) G. S. T. L. 317 (P & H) Issues:Petition for anticipatory bail against rejection in a case involving tax evasion, bribery, and corruption by officers of Excise and Taxation Department.Analysis:1. Allegations and Investigation: The FIR was filed based on information about tax evasion in collusion with Excise and Taxation Department officers. Bribe payments were made to ensure no checking of goods during transport. Call records revealed names of involved officers and the amounts paid to them. The FIR named several officers, including the petitioner.2. Anticipatory Bail Petition: The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, arguing he was not named in the FIR and no recovery was made from him. The State argued that the petitioner's involvement was disclosed during investigation, supported by a seized register showing payments made to officers, including the petitioner.3. GST and Tax Evasion: The judgment highlighted the importance of GST in ensuring free movement of goods and the impact of tax evasion on the entire chain of sellers and purchasers. The evasion of GST through connivance of transporters, passers, and officials was deemed a serious issue affecting tax collection.4. Role of Passers: The judgment explained the role of passers as mediators facilitating tax evasion by ensuring goods reach their destination without inspection. The lack of verification allows for manipulation of documents and misuse of tax credits, impacting tax collection.5. Need for Custodial Interrogation: Despite the petitioner not being directly named in the FIR or call records, the court emphasized the seriousness of the allegations, discrepancies in file inspections, and the necessity for custodial interrogation to uncover the full extent of the alleged corruption.6. Decision and Dismissal: The court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail, citing the importance of tax collection for the economy and the need for a fair and thorough investigation given the complexities and multi-dimensional aspects of the case. The petitioner's official position was seen as a potential influence on witnesses or evidence tampering.7. Final Clarification: The judgment clarified that the discussion in the decision was solely for the purpose of the petition and should not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the investigation or trial, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive probe into the alleged tax evasion and corruption.
TaxTMI 