2024 (2) TMI 996

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....132 (1) (c) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'the Act of 2017'). 2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that based on the intelligence report against applicant, the investigation was conducted under the provisions of the Act of 2017 in which it revealed that applicant being common partner in three partnership firms namely M/s Five Star Trading Companies (GSTIN: 22AAHFF8008J1ZJ), M/s Bharma Sales (GSTIN: 22ABAFP4753E1ZL); and M/s Pushpak Trading Co. (GSTIN: 22ABAFP4753E1ZL), had made purchase transactions with M/s AB Infrastructure and Engineering, M/s NB Marketing and M/s RLA Infrastructure and Engineering. Only paper transactions have been shown through aforementioned firms, invoices have been issued without any und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t that applicant has intentionally created three partnership firms, there was no supply of goods and on the basis of forged invoices the benefit of input tax credit was availed. During the course of investigation, it revealed that applicant has issued forged invoices to several companies and as per details collected during investigation, applicant has caused loss of Rs. 20,96,89,839/-. Fraud is played at PAN India level and investigation is still going on. Release of applicant on bail may hamper the investigation, which is in progress, and there is apprehension of destroying evidence and influencing witnesses to be examined during investigation. In support of his contention he places reliance upon the decision in the cases of Paritosh Kumar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....plicant. From the documents placed before this Court by learned counsel for non-applicant, it is reflecting that applicant was served with notice under Section 70 of the Act of 2017 and during investigation, non-applicant has found applicant involved in creating forged invoices availing input tax credits to the tune of Rs. 20,96,89,839/-. Mere fact that applicant is in jail since 7.2.2023 cannot be a ground to enlarge him on bail, particularly when there is submission of learned counsel for non-applicant that investigation is still going on. 7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Nimmagadda Prasad vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466 observed as under:- "23. Unfortunately, in the last few years, the country h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 25. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in....