TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 2023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... operation was conducted on 09.10.2024 at the office and residence of Vikrant Singhal and his brother Sachin Singhal and at the residence of Pradeep Kumar. During the search conducted at the residence of Sachin Singhal and Vikrant Singhal situated at C-480, Yojna Vihar, Anand Vihar, New Delhi, both the person along with another brother, Rajat Singhal and their other associate Sh. Gourav Jain fled away from the premise. However, they were intercepted later on and their statements were recorded. For their active role in availment and passing on off ineligible ITC by fraudulent means, Vikrant Singhal, Sh. Sachin Singhal and Sh. Gaurav Jain, were placed under arrest on 17.10.2024. They have been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad by order dated 25.02.2025 & 11.03.2025. That the secret data maintained by Vikrant Singhal and WhatsApp chats recovered from his mobile phones, the following 03 persons have been identified who had arranged fake firms for passing on fake ITC and arranged purchase bills for these fake firms. Name of the Persons No. of fake firms controlled Amount of ITC involved (Rs. In Cr.) Kamlesh Mishra 66 358.77 Sagar Garg 8 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....16 firms drive. The proper officer of DGGI conducts the enquiry u/s 70(1) CGST Act 2017 u/s 70(2) CGST. Every such enquiry referred to in sub section (1) shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding. That u/s 2(m) BNSS Judicial proceeding includes any proceeding in the course of which evidence is or may be taken on oath. That in CGST Act 2017 procedure of enquiry is not given then provision of BNSS will be applicable. The DGGI officer did not recorded statement according to the provisions of BNSS. That the DGGI officer violated the provisions of Section 35,36,103 of BNSS. That the accused/ applicant was arrested by DGGI Bengaluru in 2020, The Session Judge Bengaluru released the accused/ applicant on bail. That the applicant is just arrested on the mere statement made by some Vikrant Singhal, Sachin Singhal and Sh. Pradeep Kumar and not upon any complaints made against the applicant. That the chargesheet and supplementary chargesheet in the above-mentioned complaint is not filed by the Investigating officer till date and there is no possibility of filing the chargesheet in near future. The accused/applicant is under Judicial Custody form last one week and no fruitful purpose would b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ended by the Superintendent of Police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing. 11.6. Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41-A CrPC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing; 11.7. Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of Court to be instituted before the High Court having territorial jurisdiction. 11.8. Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the Judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court." We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the case under Section 498-A IPC or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a terms which may be less than seven or which may extend to seven years, whether with or without fine." II. The High Court s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... matter of Satinder Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation has laid down by the guidelines for grant of bail. According to the guidelines framed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the applicant is entitled for grant of bail, the same view has been followed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Pradeep Kumar Vs. State of U.P. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, in the matter of R. Vasudevan Vs. CBI and H.B. Chaturvedi Vs. CBI. It has been held that "No doubt the grant of bail in a non-bailable offence is a matter of discretion which the Court has exercised judicially but at the same time the bail should not be denied to an accused only as a matter of punishment. There are two paramount considerations which the Court has to consider while enlarging the accused on bail. First as to what 6 is the gravity of the offence and whether the accused would submit himself to processes of law or not? Secondly will the grant of bail endanger the fair investigation or the holding of a fair trial or in other words will the accused tamper with evidence". The Applicant/ Accused also will abide by all the terms and conditions, which may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l but in such cases, `necessity' is the operative test. In this country, it would be quite contrary to the concept of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution that any person should be punished in respect of any matter, upon which, he has not been convicted or that in any circumstances, he should be deprived of his liberty upon only the belief that he will tamper with the witnesses if left at liberty, save in the most extraordinary circumstances. 23. Apart from the question of prevention being the object of a refusal of bail, one must not lose sight of the fact that any imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content and it would be improper for any Court to refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of former conduct whether the accused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an un-convicted person for the purpose of giving him a taste of imprisonment as a lesson. 24. In the instant case, we have already noticed that the "pointing finger of accusation" against the appellants is "the seriousness of the charge". The offences alleged are economic offences which have resulted in loss to the state exchequer. Though, they contend tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en by Kamlesh Mishra in his records, but he was not found there. Then address of Shri Kamlesh Mishra was located and search was carried out at his premises. This shows that if enlarged on bail, he can abscond, tamper with the evidences and influence the witnesses, as he is a habitual offender. Further investigations are going on in this case and if enlarged on bail, it will hamper the investigation. 7. In support of his arguments, he has placed reliance upon the Judgments namely Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy V. CBI (2013) 7 SCC 439. Ram Narain Popli vs Central Bureau of Investigation (Appeal (Crl.). 1097 of 1999. Nimmagadda Prasad vs C.B.I. Hyderabad on 9 May, 2013 S.C. AIR 2013. Serious Fraud Investigation Vs Nittin Jokari 2019 S.C. (Cr. A No. 1381/2019). Union of India vs Padam Narain Aggarwal etc. 2008 S.C. Cr A 1575/2008. Radheshyam Kejriwal vs State of West Bengol & Aur 2011 S.C. Cra No. 1097/2003. Govind Agarwal vs State of U.P. and another 2020 ILC (ALL) (C.R.P.C 438 No. 1337/2020 Misc.). Rajesh Goyal Vs. Union of India (High Court of Rajasthan) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 726 of 2011. PV Ramana Reddy vs Union of India on 18 April 2019 (H.C. Telangana). Tejas Dugad ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tity so that I may not get associated with this fake invoicing. The contents in these chats are related to fake firms made by me and fake invoicing done from these firms. To justify the fake invoicing, the payment used to be transferred by the buyer firms to my fake firms and from my fake firms, I used to transfer the same to the supplier firms (from which fake supplies was shown to my fake firms) and from these supplier firms, the payment was routed to the accounts of the angadiyas (who deal in cash) and cash was taken from theses angadiyas. The cash, after deducting my commission, was given back to Shri Vikrant Singhal. I am explaining some whatsapp chats related to the above modus operandi as explained by me. In the year 2018 to 2020, I had arranged fake Directors and fake purchases for some companies of Shri Vikrant Singhal and Shri Sachin Singhal. These were M/s Valley Infralinks Pvt. Ltd., M/s Bishorn Realtech Pvt. Ltd., M/s Mild India Realtech Pvt. Ltd., M/s Yadan Realtech Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Freezo Construction Pvt. Ltd. They had done fake invoicing from these companies and the bank accounts of these companies were in Bandhan Bank, Main Market, Saharanpur. I remember because ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2,67,142 22 07EAHPS3263Q1ZW S S Enterprises 29,82,15,610 5,46,48,869 23 07BPQPP1044BIZ2 Ashoka Enterprises 29,91,64,454 5,42,71,280 24 07AWQPC9552PIZO Mangla Traders 29,98,63,083 5,42,39,720 25 07GVGPS0043LIZA Mahindra Corporation 30,07,30,482 5,41,31,487 26 07PSFPS2015KIZA Metallum Industrises 29,88.62,800 5,37,95,304 27 07CQTPA9601C1ZY Arun Traders 29,73,55,418 5,35,49,735 28 07ISOPS5964RIZ6 Morya Enterprises 29.54,81,753 5,31,86,716 29 07DLVPP8581A1ZH Hebrew Industrises 29,44.14,861 5,29.94,675 30 07CHVPG6538DIZ1 Gautam Lauha Industrises 29,42,80,671 5,29,70,521 31 07OGGPS9908RIZX Ganesh Steel 29,37,01,165 5,28,66,210 32 07IVRPK7426QIZE Tarang Enterprises 29,29,41,205 5,27.29,417 33 07RMVPS9720MIZI Crystal Enterprises 29,25,52,233 5,26,59,402 34 07BSKPC5740EIZY Chandra Goods 28,74,62,025 5,17,43,165 35 07HVCPM3344HIZI Muskan Enterprises 27,45,26,092 4,94,14,697 36 07GDXPK1017FIZF Aditya Corporation 27.39,22,468 4,93.06.044 37 07JYFPK0230LIZD Drishya....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Prop. Shri Kamlesh Mishra). no. 313, Namdhari Chamber, 9/54, D.B. Gupta Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 :- Serial No. Description of Documents Make/markar model/page No- Remarks 1. Huaen bill counter (Cash counting machine) model no-H6500 Huaen make 01 2. Worldone Pristine Series Cheque leaves containing folder Light Green Colour Many cheque leaves of M/s Gulmohar Enterprises, Kshetri Trading com., Purohit Traders, Das Udyog, jitender Printer etc. 3. Worldone Radiant Series Chaque leaves containing folder Grass Green Colour Many cheque leaves of M/s Sachin Enterprises, Satish Traders, Mangla Traders, Om Metal, Arun Traders, Das Udyog, etc 4. Plastic box containing sim cards and passport size photographs in 87 small plastic pouches Mastercook 580 ml volume Light Yellow 5. Plastic box containing Digital Signature Certificates (DSCs) 24 no.s Mastercook 290 ml volume Light yellow 6. Plastic box containing 20 number of stamps of various firms/companies Paras Homeware captain 22 Transparent box 7. Carrybag containing 19 mobile phones "Goyal sons" Green colour 8. Smart phone of Realme C-53....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scription of : Documents Make/markar model/page No. Remarks 1. Misc documents White Transparent Plastic Folder 1-42 2. I-phone-14 S.No. HYHJPQFCVN Mobile no. 7428597729 Password-159258 Light Purple Colour 3. SAMSUNG Galaxy F-15 5G S.No. RZCX92YGZPV Mobile No. 8920181321 Password-987258 Grey Colour 4. I-phone 16 Pro S.No. M7K7X76N36 Mobile No. 8920569485 Password-987258 Peach Colour 5. I-phone 15 Pro S.No. JQN6170P32 Mobile No. 6005767042 Password-987258 Dark Grey 9. It is alleged that applicant/accused managed and controlled above mentioned 66 firms and the brain behind the entire of availment of fake ITC on the strength of invioces taken without receipt of underlying goods and passing on of the fake ITC by issuing invoices of those firms without supply of goods is of applicant/accused. 10. The intention of the accused is of having transactions without actual supply of goods, for claiming input tax credit (ITC) and for the aforesaid purpose fake invoices and bills were prepared. Thus the applicant/accused Gaurav Gupta appears to be the mastermind in defrauding the Government exchequer by availing and utilizing ....