TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 1645
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at Zonal office, Jalandhar. [2]. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Raman Kumar Garg is the sole proprietor of export firm namely M/s Jaldhara Exports, which is involved in the export of readymade garments. The aforesaid firm claimed refund to the tune of Rs. 1.64 crores, but an amount of Rs. 1.56 crores was sanctioned to the firm. During inquiry, the documentation submitted by the said firm viz. the shipping bills etc., were found to be forged and fabricated. Resultantly, FIR No.126 dated 26.07.2013 under Sections 177, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 IPC was registered at Police Station Division No.5, Civil Lines, Ludhiana. [3]. Learned counsel further submitted that at a later stage, the petitioner was also nominated as one ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....il. The proceedings in terms of ECIR are the offshoot of the FIR in question, therefore, petitioner is entitled to bail in view of decision rendered in Shiv Raj Puri vs. State of Haryana and another, 2015(3) RCR (Criminal) 385 and order dated 28.01.2014 passed in CRM-M No.2674 of 2014 titled 'Karampal Goyal vs. Gurnam Singh.' [5]. Learned counsel further submitted that in the FIR No.126 dated 26.07.2013 the proceedings have been stayed at the instance of Raman Kumar Garg and he has been granted anticipatory bail. Now in the ECIR proceedings, after a lapse of four years, it would not be appropriate to seek custody of the petitioner, particularly when the petitioner has been granted regular bail in the FIR where the trial has been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... FIR was registered against the proprietor of M/s Jaldhara Exports, Ludhiana i.e. Raman Kumar Garg and challan was presented against him and the petitioner. Raman Kumar Garg had obtained VAT refund of Rs. 1,56,76,190/- on the basis of forged and fabricated documents from Excise and Taxation Department, Ludhiana. After deposit of the amount in the account of M/s Jaldhara Exports in State Bank of India, it was transferred through RTGS in the accounts of proprietorship concerns of Smt. Sangeeta Garg, Umesh Kumar, Seema Garg, Saiyarh Garg and Vinod Garg in different accounts maintained with the DCB Bank, Ludhiana. [8]. Learned counsel further submitted that as per the investigation, it came to fore that an amount of Rs. 70,000/- came in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceeds of the crime are still to be identified and attached, but for want of cooperation by the petitioner, the needful could not be done for so long. Petitioner had helped his son Raman Kumar Garg in generating, concealing and projecting the proceeds of crime as untainted. The role of the petitioner viz-a-viz. in the share process is yet to be confirmed for want of joining in the investigation despite the decision by this Court in the aforesaid civil writ petition. Major portion of the proceeds of the crime is still to be traced out. In the event of non co-operation by the petitioner and by not responding to the summons, the petitioner has made himself disentitled to any equitable and extra ordinary relief. In the civil writ petition, th....