Delhi HC denies anticipatory bail in GST evasion case involving misuse of CA's PAN and crore-rupee transactions

Delhi HC dismissed anticipatory bail application in GST evasion case involving misuse of CA's PAN number. Applicants were directors of entities conducting crore-rupee transactions with M/s Madhu Enterprises, registered using mobile number of applicants' security guard. Court found applicants' statements contradictory and evasive regarding dealings with the enterprise. Despite providing some documents, applicants denied involvement with key witness whose statement was recorded. HC held custodial interrogation necessary to uncover complete transaction chain, distinguishing Supreme Court precedent cited by applicants as inapplicable to present facts.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Allegations of fraudulent GST registration and transactions.
2. Applicants' cooperation with the investigation.
3. Necessity of custodial interrogation.

Summary:

1. Allegations of Fraudulent GST Registration and Transactions:
The case involves allegations that a GST number was fraudulently generated in the name of M/s Madhu Enterprises using the complainant's PAN number, resulting in transactions worth Rs. 14.80 Crores. The investigation revealed that the address used for GST registration was false, and the mobile number used was linked to an employee of the applicant. Further interrogation indicated that the applicants, along with their father, were involved in opening bank accounts and registering firms in the names of their employees for fraudulent transactions. The investigation also uncovered significant business transactions between the fraudulently registered firm and entities controlled by the applicants.

2. Applicants' Cooperation with the Investigation:
The applicants claimed to have complied with all notices and provided necessary documents. However, the investigating officer reported that the applicants were evasive and did not provide crucial details about their transactions with the fraudulent firm. The applicants argued that the documents were seized by the GST Department, Jamshedpur, but the court noted contradictions in their statements regarding their dealings with M/s Madhu Enterprises.

3. Necessity of Custodial Interrogation:
The court found that the applicants' evasive responses and the need to uncover the entire chain of fraudulent transactions necessitated custodial interrogation. The court cited the Supreme Court's observation that custodial interrogation is more effective in eliciting information than questioning under the protection of anticipatory bail.

Judgment:
The applications for anticipatory bail were dismissed, and the interim protection granted to the applicants was withdrawn. The court emphasized that custodial interrogation was necessary to unearth the entire chain of transactions linked with M/s Madhu Enterprises. The judgment explicitly stated that the observations were only for the purpose of the present applications and not an opinion on the merits of the case.

---