TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 699
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Sections 132(1) (b), 132 (1) (i) C.G.S.T. Act, 2017 Department D.G.G.I. Meerut Zonal Unit District Meerut, with the prayer to grant him anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case. Learned counsel for the applic Compliance affidavit filed by State is taken on record. ant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in this case and the case of the prosecution as is evident from the record is that one Shri Abhishek Jain purportedly the Proprietor of M/s. Alaknanda Bitumen is found involved in illegal activities of passing fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) by generating fake firms without there being any actual supply of goods and services and by creating 17 fake firms about 170 crores of ITC....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aving any concern with the same and no criminal liability could be fastened on the applicant, with regard to the same. It is also submitted that the applicant has never received any money from any of the suppliers or buyers of the firms of Abhishek Jain directly in his bank account and was not associated with any of the alleged fake firms, in whatever capacity and admittedly the applicant is not a beneficiary of any fraudulent ITC prepared or passed by or on behalf of the Abhishek Jain. It is also submitted that the main accused of the instant case Mr. Abhishek Jain has been granted default bail from the Sessions Court, Meerut and the applicant on the basis of parity is also entitled for grant of the facility of anticipatory bail. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f 2020, order dated 05.01.2021, Allahabad High Court, Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another [(2014)8 SCC 273], Sh. Raghav Agarwal Vs. Commissioner of Central Tax and GST Delhi North [Bail Application No. 4019 of 2020, order dated 16.12.2021, Delhi High Court], M/s. Jayachandran Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. The Superintendent of GST and Central Excise [Writ Petition No. 5501 of 2019, order dated 04.04.2019, High Court of Judicature at Madras], Directorate of Enforcement vs. Deepak Mahajan [1994 AIR SC 1775], State of Haryana and others vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors. [1992 AIR 604], Sh. Saurav Gupta vs. CGST (Delhi East) [Bail Application No. 1408 of 2021, order dt. 28.5.2021, Delhi High Court], Lupija Saluja vs. DGGI & another [Bail Application No....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons firms have passed ITS of Rs. 599.15 Lakhs during the period 2018-19 to 2021-22. It is also submitted that this ITC appears to be fake as the inward suppliers were either cancelled or were having gross self mismatch of ITC availed in their GSTR- 2 A and GSTR-3 B or both and in the supplies shown by the inward suppliers to each other, a nexus was found to be created to camouflage the real beneficiary, thus it was anticipated that total Rs. 599.15 Lakhs fake ITC has passed on by these suppliers to M/s N.K. Enterprises during the aforesaid period by creating 18 fake firms. It is further submitted that the name of the instant applicant has been depicted by Shri Abhishek Jain Proprietor of Alaknanda Bitumen who in his statement dated 29....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gra 2011)1 SCC 694 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1 as well as the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in P. Chidambaram vs. Directorate of Enforcement (Criminal Appeal No. 1831 of 2019, it is evident that co-accused Abhishek Jain was arrested by the Investigating Agency and the name of the instant applicant has surfaced in his statement. Mr. Abhishek Jain in his statement has categorically stated that he used to purchase the goods amongst others from the instant applicant also and had obtained fake invoices without actual supplies of goods from the instant applicant and had claimed a total fraudulent ITC to the tune of Rs. 599.15 Lakhs. Thus prima facie it reflects that the instant applicant was one of the....