TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>Fraudulent input tax credit (ITC) accused granted regular bail; documentary evidence seized, surety bonds ordered</h1> Dominant issue: grant of regular bail to an applicant accused of fraudulent input tax credit (ITC) under Sections 132(1)(B), 132(1)(C) r/w 132(5) of the ... Seeking grant of regular bail - availing and passing on of fraudulent ITC - genuineness of the firm and its business - pendency of trial/ investigation, in offence under Sections 132(1)(B), 132(1)(C) read with 132(5) of Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 punishable under Sections 132(1)(I) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 20(XV) of the IGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The prosecution case is based upon documentary evidence which have already been collected and in such circumstances, the benefit of bail should be extended in favour of the accused. In the present case also, petitioner has allegedly claimed false input tax credit to the tune of Rs. 7.46 crores. Maximum punishment prescribed for the said offence is five years and the offence upto evasion of input tax credit to the tune of Rs.5 crore is bailable. All the documents have already been taken into possession from the petitioner and case against him is based on documentary evidence. There is no history of past involvement of petitioner in any such similar case. The offences in question are Magisterial Trial. The petitioner is in custody for the last five and half months and trial is certainly going to take a long time to conclude and as such, no useful purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in custody anymore and he deserves to be released on bail. Having regard to the aforesaid factual position, but without commenting anything upon the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned, on usual terms and conditions. Issues: Whether the petitioner, accused of availing and passing on fraudulent input tax credit under provisions of the CGST/IGST Acts and arrested in connection therewith, is entitled to regular bail during the pendency of trial.Analysis: The matter concerns alleged availment and distribution of fraudulent input tax credit and offences triable by a Magistrate under specified provisions of the CGST/IGST legislation. The prosecution case is documentary in character and the relevant records have been taken into possession. The maximum sentence prescribed is limited to five years and the petitioner has been in custody for a period substantially long relative to the expected duration of trial. Precedent authority indicates that in cases triable by a Magistrate, based primarily on documentary evidence and lacking antecedents or extraordinary circumstances, bail is ordinarily permissible until conclusion of trial. Consideration was given to the risk of the accused influencing co-accused or evidence, balanced against the nature of evidence already seized and absence of prior involvement.Conclusion: The petition for regular bail is allowed and the petitioner is to be released on furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial court/duty magistrate on usual terms and conditions, without any comment on merits of the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
