https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759340 The HC granted bail to the petitioner charged under sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 for allegedly creating fake firms and utilizing ITC worth Rs. 54.33 crore. The court found that prosecution allegations were based solely on witness statements without documentary evidence, despite claiming to have relevant documents. Given the petitioner's detention since June 25, 2024, the five-year maximum punishment, unlikely early trial conclusion, and absence of evidence tampering or flight risk concerns, bail was granted on furnishing Rs. 1,00,000 bond with two sureties. en-us Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:03:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759340 The HC granted bail to the petitioner charged under sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 for allegedly creating fake firms and utilizing ITC worth Rs. 54.33 crore. The court found that prosecution allegations were based solely on witness statements without documentary evidence, despite claiming to have relevant documents. Given the petitioner's detention since June 25, 2024, the five-year maximum punishment, unlikely early trial conclusion, and absence of evidence tampering or flight risk concerns, bail was granted on furnishing Rs. 1,00,000 bond with two sureties. Case-Laws GST Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759340