TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 891
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....MPL are either found to be non-existent or non-operational. During investigation M/s SMPL was found to have availed fake ITC of Rs. 79.12 Crore and passing on of same, fraudulently, on the strength of bogus invoices without supply of concomitant goods. On the basis of the above facts, searches were conducted at the registered premises of the supplier firms/companies of M/s Sanraj Metals Pvt. Ltd. namely, M/s Ovnil Trademart Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, M/s Vivrak Impex Pvt. Ltd., M/s Indoden Tradex Pvt. Ltd., M/s Town Standards Pvt. Ltd., M/s Yrofame Exim Pvt. Ltd., M/s Solared Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Rekwell Trademart Pvt. Ltd. Which were found to be non-existent/non-operational. These non-existent firms were found to have issued bogus invoices involving fake/ineligible ITC of Rs. 79.12 Crore to M/s Sanraj Metals Pvt. Ltd. without supply of any goods during the period Jan' 21 to March' 23. M/s Sanraj Metals Pvt. Ltd. have further passed on ineligible ITC or have issued bogus invoices involving fake ITC of Rs. 79.12 Crore (Upto Jan' 23) without supply of concomitant goods. The directors and proprietors of these supplier entities were summoned on more than one occasion to put forth their views. Most....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso filed rejoinder to the bail application filed before the Ld. Special CJM. In the present matter the applicant/ accused has been illegally arrested by the officers of complainant on 19.5.2023 from Manipal Hospital, Palam Vihar, Gurugram, Haryana where the applicant had gone for his physical checkup because of uneasiness during the search operations carried by the Complainant u/s 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short "the Act') on 19.05.2023 at 1413, C Block, Palam Vihar, Near Vyapar Kendra, Gurugram, Haryana which is the residence of Ms. Nivita Jain (the daughter of the applicant) who happens to be the sleeping director because of her medical condition of M/s Sanraj Metals Pvt. Ltd. ('Sanraj'). During the search, a panchnama was also drawn. Sanraj is registered under the Act with the State Tax Authorities at Gurugram, 73/8, IMT Manesar, Gurugram, Haryana, 122052 with GSTN No.- 06ABECS9793E1ZW. Shri Sanjeev Kumar is the executive Director/ Authorized Signatory of Sanraj. Based on intelligence, the action is already underway by the State Tax Authorities of Haryana, beginning from 21.12.2021. Thereafter, the DGGI Authorities at Gurugram caused sea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the offence us 132(1)(i) is five years' imprisonment and fine. The allegations levelled against the applicant are not sustainable in law when the applicant is not a registered person and is not connected with day-to-day operation of Sanraj, he is only associated with the banking operations for the company on behalf of his daughter (Sleeping partner) who gave him the rights. As per the order of Ld. Special CJM dated 30.05.2023, the applicant was sent to the complainant's custody where his statement was recorded as per the rules laid down in the said order. It is clear that the applicant's part was completed in the investigation after recording the applicant's statement on 31.05.2023. As the Applicant is not involved in daily operations of the business as he is not the director of Sanraj. As per panchnama drawn on 19.05.2023, nothing incriminating documents/material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant/accused. During search operation on 19.5.2023, the applicant requested to deliver the summon u/S. 70 of the Act mentioning the date of appearance without insisting upon to accompany to them. Whereas the complainant wanted the applicant to accompany....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....udicating proceeding and criminal prosecution can be launched simultaneously. Decision in adjudication proceeding is not necessary before initiating criminal prosecution. The adjudication proceeding and criminal proceedings are independent in nature to each other. The finding against the person facing prosecution in adjudication proceeding is not binding on the proceeding for criminal prosecution. He further relied on Ram Narayan Popli versus CBI reported in 2003 (3) SCC 641, Nimmagadda Prasad Versus CBI reported in AIR 2013 SC 283, Serious Fraud Investigation versus Nittin Johri reported in AIR 2019 SC 4380, wherein it was held that economic offence constituted a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offence affecting the economy of the country. In Govind Aggarwal versus State of U.P. bail application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 1337 of 2020, the Hon'ble Allahabad High court has held that power of arrest should be exercised where:- (i) A person is involved in evasi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... matter of one Amit Gupta in connection with case No. 2415 of 2022 who was running several companies and receiving fake invoices from non-existent firms. The State G.S.T. Haryana also registered a case against the present applicant and thereafter, transferred the same to the Central G.S.T. Department, Gurugram Office, Haryana. DGGI Meerut took over investigation against the applicant in connection with case No. 2415 of 2021, which falls in its jurisdiction, and it has been found that M/s Sanraj Metals Private Limited supplied fake invoices to Amit Gupta and on the basis of fake invoices received from several non-existent/non-operational firms, and thus, claimed fake/ineligible ITC of Rs. 79.12 crores during the period from January 2021 to March 2023. M/s SMPL further passed on ineligible ITC to the tune of Rs. 79.12 crores up to January 2023 and till date this amount has been found 96 crores which has been passed on as ITC by SMPL to M/s Brilliance Metals Private Limited. Thus, the purpose of applicant was to enrich himself through receiving and issuing fake invoiced which were used for commission of offence. The applicant did not co-operate with the investigation and refused to gi....