2026 (3) TMI 1621 - HC - GST

GST offences below the statutory threshold are non-cognizable and bailable, so anticipatory bail was refused on apprehended arrest.

Anticipatory bail in GST proceedings was declined because the alleged liability was assessed below the statutory threshold that makes the offence ... Entitlement to Anticipatory bail - fraudulent Input Tax Credit - commission of offence punishable under Sections 69 & 132 of CGST/CGGST Act, 2017 - Non-cognizable and bailable GST offence. Anticipatory bail - Non-cognizable and bailable GST offence - Apprehension of arrest - HELD THAT: - The Court found from the record that the proceedings against the applicant related to a GST liability of less than Rs. 5 crore. On that basis, it held that under Section 132 of the GST Act, an offence involving an amount below that threshold is non-cognizable and bailable. Since the application under Section 482 BNSS was founded on an apprehension of arrest in respect of such an offence, the Court held that the plea for anticipatory bail was devoid of merit. [Paras 6, 7] The anticipatory bail application was rejected. Final Conclusion: The Court rejected the application for anticipatory bail, holding that the alleged GST offence involved liability below Rs. 5 crore and was therefore non-cognizable and bailable, making the apprehension-based plea untenable. Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted where the alleged GST offence was found to relate to a liability below the statutory monetary threshold and was therefore treated as a non-cognizable and bailable offence.Analysis: The application was moved under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on the basis of an apprehension of arrest in GST proceedings. On the material placed before the Court, the total GST liability was found to be Rs. 1,16,22,215/-, with the recoverable amount from the applicant's firm being Rs. 74,89,846/-. The Court treated the case as relating to an amount below Rs. 5 crore and applied the statutory position under Section 132 of the GST law that offences involving an amount below that threshold are non-cognizable and bailable. In that view, the apprehension of arrest did not justify invocation of anticipatory bail.Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined and the application was rejected.Ratio Decidendi: Where the alleged GST offence, on the Court's assessment, falls below the monetary threshold that makes it non-cognizable and bailable, anticipatory bail on the basis of apprehended arrest is not maintainable on merits.