TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 120
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ued fake invoices in the name of eight non-existent and fictitious business entities without physical movement of the goods and both being defacto operators have lodged claim of wrongful utilization of bogus ITC on the strength of fake invoices without physical receipt of the goods. Similarly such activities are said to have been carried out by this Petitioner with accused Basant Kumar Pattnaik. It is stated that this Petitioner and Basant by such clandestine business activities have been able to pass on huge Input Tax Credit (ITC) to the tune of more than Rs. 72.00 crores and received ITC of around Rs. 8.5 crores being passed on to M/s. Satguru Metal & Power Private Ltd. and M/s. Tirupati Traders. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has made all genuine sale and purchase of goods using genuine GSTN and has paid the GST. He further submitted that the complaint petition reveals that the accused Basant being a resident of Rourkela is the mastermind in creating and operating eight numbers of fictitious business entities who used to obtain basic personal identity documents from the proprietors of the firms by misutilizing those documents had registered ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of grant of bail, he has invited the attention of the Court to the orders passed by this Court in case of Rama Chandra Mallick vs. State of Odisha & Others (BLAPL No. 10958of 2019 disposed of on 17.3.2020) and Pramod Kumar Sahoo vs. State of Odisha & Others (BLAPL No. 4125 of 2020 disposed of on 23.12.2020) in granting bail to the Petitioners therein. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel, CT & GST opposed the move. He submitted that the prayer for grant of bail to the Petitioner having earlier been rejected in BLAPL No. 6354 of 2021, there is no change in the circumstances for reconsideration of the said prayer. According to him, the Petitioner being involved in commission of economic offence and on the face of the materials collected that the Petitioner had all the role in defrauding the State Exchequer to the tune of huge sum by passing over bogus ITC and receiving the ITC simply by managing to have the transactions reflected in the papers without physical movement of the goods or services and in the process has created numerous fake documents such as invoices, bills etc. besides having the hand in creating and operating the fake Firms and opening Bank accounts in the name of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations (vide Prahlad Singh Bhati v. NCT, Delhi and another (2001) 4 SCC 280). There is no hard and fast rule regarding grant or refusal to grant bail. Each case has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of each case and on its own merits. The discretion 17 of the court has to be exercised judiciously and not in an arbitrary manner". 9. In "Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan and another"; (2004) 7 SCC 528, the Hon'ble Apex Court has said as under:- "11. The law in regard to grant or refusal of bail is very well settled. The court granting bail should exercise its discretion in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. Though at the stage of granting bail a detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the merit of the case need not be undertaken, there is a need to indicate in such orders reasons f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thwarted by grant of bail [see Prahlad Singh Bhati v. NCT, Delhi (2001) 4 SCC 280 and Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) (1978) 1 SCC 118]. While a vague allegation that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses may not be a ground to refuse bail, if the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or if there is material to show that he will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence, then bail will be refused........". 10. In the given case, the complaint has been lodged against the Petitioner and others for commission of the aforesaid offences under section 132(1)(b)(c) and (1) of the OGST Act. The maximum punishment prescribed thereunder is the imprisonment for a term of five years and with fine in case the amount of tax evaded or the ITC wrongly availed or utilized or the amount of refund wrongly taken exceeds Rs. 500.00 lakh. The investigation having commenced on the basis of complaint by two business firms claiming to be the victims of the GST fraud by the Petitioner and other having received the goods supplied by the Petitioner under the coverage of fictitious invoices issued in the name of ....