2023 (2) TMI 275

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccused. As per the reply of DGGI DZU it is mentioned that on 11.09.2019 under a pan India operation regarding issue of fraudulent availment of IGST refund by exporters and passing fraudulent input tax credit (ITC) by their suppliers, proceedings were initiated at the office of M/s Aqualite Impex Pvt. Ltd (AIPL) regarding availment of IGST refund. During investigation against AIPL, it revealed that said company had fraudulently claimed inadmissible IGST refund and it was also found that Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence had also previously investigated the case of fraudulent availment of drawback by AIPL. In the investigation of the DGGI DZU, it revealed that one of the supplier of AIPL were above mentioned firms and it was found t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o furnish all the relevant documents regarding business activities of his firms and also to join the investigation. Counsel for the accused/applicant has relied upon judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Tarun Jain vs. Director General DGGI (in Bail Application No.3771/2021 decided on 26.11.2021). Counsel for the accused has also referred to judgment in the matter of Make My Trip vs. Union of India and submitted that since it has already been laid down in the said judgment that Department is yet to finalize the assessment, till that stage accused is entitled for anticipatory bail. Even on medical grounds ld. Counsel for the accused submits that accused/applicant had undergone a surgery last year and is still medically unwell. In this r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has also opposed the bail application on medical grounds also. At the outset it is required to be noted that the documents as relied upon by the ld. Counsel for the accused/applicant i.e. panchnama dated 11.09.2019, perusal of the same would clearly show that such proceedings were initiated by DGGI Head Quarter and it is mentioned in that panchnama that those proceedings were with regard to GST evasion initiated by Head Quarter of DGGI whereas the proceedings in question are initiated by DGGI DZU. As such document heavily relied upon by ld. Counsel for the accused/applicant is not only irrelevant to the proceedings rather a faint attempt to misguide the court. As per the allegations as noted above, accused/applicant being partner/propri....