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>Anticipatory bail denied in GST evasion case involving fake firms and forged documents under IPC Sections 467, 471</h1> <h3>Aman Gupta Versus State</h3> Delhi HC dismissed anticipatory bail application in GST evasion case. Applicant allegedly created fake firms, received payments with GST but failed to ... Seeking grant of Anticipatory Bail - Evasion of GST - creating fake, forged and fabricated firms and received payments including GST in different accounts against the purchased goods from the complainant, but have not deposited GST with the GST department - HELD THAT:- The present case is not just relating to the applicant having duped the complainant of a huge sum of money, it also involves allegations of issuing fake invoices and e-way bills for the purposes of GST evasion, which is an economic offence involving loss to the public exchequer. Such offences need to be viewed seriously as the same pose a threat to the economy of the country. Further, the present case involves offence under Section 467 of the IPC read with Section 471 of the IPC, for which the maximum punishment is imprisonment for life. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the applicant needs to be confronted with various documents and statements of the witnesses, and the allegations levelled against him are serious, being in the nature of forgery and GST evasion by creating false invoices issued by non-existent entities, no grounds for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant are made out. The present bail application along with all pending applications is dismissed. Issues: Application for anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of fraud, forgery, and GST evasion.Details:1. The applicant, a CA, was accused of inducing the complainant to purchase goods from fake firms, resulting in a loss of Rs. 2,81,99,475.2. The applicant allegedly received payments from the complainant but did not deposit GST with the department.3. The complainant was arrested for GST evasion, and evidence suggested the applicant's involvement in financial transactions.4. The applicant cooperated with the investigation but was accused of not fully cooperating.5. The applicant filed multiple bail applications, withdrew one, and sought mediation to settle the matter.6. The court noted the abuse of the legal process by the applicant in seeking bail repeatedly.7. The applicant's intent to secure interim protection for settlement purposes was highlighted.8. The court found evidence suggesting the applicant's involvement in running non-existent firms for GST evasion.9. The severity of the offence, involving forgery and GST evasion, was emphasized.10. Custodial interrogation was deemed necessary to recover proceeds of crime and unravel the conspiracy.11. Granting anticipatory bail was considered prejudicial to the ongoing investigation.12. The court dismissed the bail application and vacated the interim protection granted to the applicant.13. Observations made were clarified as solely for deciding the present application without expressing opinions on the case's merits.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
