Bail granted for wrongful Input Tax Credit utilization worth Rs. 7.23 crore upon Rs. 70 lakh deposit

The HC granted bail to an applicant charged with wrongfully utilizing Input Tax Credit of Rs. 6,95,32,472 and supplying taxable goods without payment of taxes worth Rs. 27,70,559, totaling Rs. 7,23,03,031. The court noted that offences under the Act are bailable and non-cognizable except under Section 132(5), the maximum sentence is 5 years with fine, and the applicant had been in custody since 27.10.2021. Considering co-accused were already granted bail and the compoundable nature of the offence, bail was granted upon deposit of Rs. 70 lakhs under protest.

---

---

Issues:
Grant of bail in connection with a case under Sections 132 (1)(a) & 132 (1)(c) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Applicant's Submission:
The applicant, a Proprietor of a trading firm, was arrested for alleged tax evasion. The defense argues innocence, claiming false implication and lack of due procedure. It is contended that the offense is compoundable and bailable for amounts up to Rs. 5 crores. Co-accused have been granted bail. The defense asserts cooperation with authorities, challenges the allegations, and highlights flaws in the GST system for cross-checking Input Tax Credit.

2. Opposing Counsel's Argument:
The prosecution opposes bail, alleging habitual involvement in fake invoice procurement leading to tax evasion. The defense's conduct during investigation is questioned, emphasizing violations of tax laws. Legal precedents are cited to stress the seriousness of economic offenses and the need for a stringent approach towards bail in such cases.

3. Court's Decision:
Considering both arguments, the court notes the substantial amount involved in the alleged offenses and the potential severity of punishment. However, it acknowledges the applicant's prolonged detention without completion of the investigation. Previous bail grants to co-accused are also considered. The court orders bail upon the deposit of Rs. 70 lakhs, subject to various conditions including personal bond, appearance before the trial court, property declaration, and non-alienation of assets.

4. Precedents and Legal Principles:
The judgment references legal principles emphasizing the seriousness of economic offenses, the need for evidence supporting charges during bail considerations, and the importance of securing public interest in such cases. The court balances these principles with the specific circumstances of the case to arrive at a decision regarding bail.

5. Conclusion:
The court allows the bail application under specified conditions, taking into account the nature of the alleged offenses, the period of detention, and the amount involved. The decision reflects a balance between the seriousness of economic crimes and the individual's rights pending trial, ensuring compliance with legal requirements and protection of public interest.

---