TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bail application, in brief, are that on receipt of an information through reliable sources that some persons are indulging in tax evasion on supply of coke, the Joint Director, DGGI Guwahati Zonal Unit, authorised a search of the residence of the petitioner which is located at 16th floor, Shangri La Towers, Games Village, Borsajai, Lalmati, Guwahati, on 18.08.2025. 4. During search operation, conducted on 19.08.2025, in the residence of the petitioner, a mobile handset and a laptop were seized and Panchnama was drawn and thereafter, the petitioner was summoned by the officials of the DGGI under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017. 5. It is alleged that the petitioner is a part of a syndicate which provides fake invoices to coal suppliers to enable them to supply of coal from Assam to Bihar without payment of GST & Coal Cess. It is also alleged that the petitioner provides fake invoices in the name of non-existing firms to these coal traders and E-way bills were shown to have been issued by these fake firms for smooth movement of coal without payment of GST. 6. It is also alleged that the tax evasion, by taking recourse of issuance of such E-way bills, was found to the tune of Rs. 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appearance for the petitioner in this case. However, Mr. Saikia submits that he has obtained the consent of the Government of Assam for appearing in this case. In support of his submissions, the learned Senior Counsel has cited a ruling of the Apex Court in the case of "T.C.Hingorani Vs.G.P.Mishra" reported in "1965 SCC OnLine SC 365". 13. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for both sides and have gone through the rulings cited by them in support of their submissions on the above-mentioned issue. 14. On perusal of the provisions contained in the Article 165 of the Constitution of India, it appears that the Advocate General of a State holds his office during the pleasure of the Governor of that State. He has to give advice to the government of the State, he also as to perform such other duties of a legal character as may be assigned to him by the Governor of the State and also has to discharge other functions conferred on him by the provisions of the Constitution of India or any other law in force. 15. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides on the preliminary objection raised by the learned Standing Counsel, DGGI. Though, while....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the instant case, formal complaint is yet to be filed by the DGGI against the present petitioner, hence, the proceeding against him is pending at pre-accusation stage. He submits that search of the premises of the petitioner and seizure of his laptop and mobile was made only on the basis of suspicion. 20. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner, after receipt of summons from DGGI, has appeared before the Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI, Guwahati Zonal Unit on 19.08.2025 and has cooperated in the investigation. However, in spite of that, the petitioner was arrested on 20.08.2025 at 3:50 PM. 21. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the authorisation for arrest issued by the Additional Director General, DGGI on 20.08.2025, it is alleged that the petitioner has committed offence under Section 132(1)(a) of the CGST Act, 2017 which is punishable under Sections 132(1)(i) of the said Act. He submits that the punishment prescribed for the alleged offence extends to imprisonment for 5(five) years and with fine, as such, there is a requirement under Section 35(3)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to arrest has to be justified in pursuant to the provisions contained in Section 35 of BNSS which the arresting authority has failed to do in the instant case and therefore, he submits that the petitioner is entitled to get bail in this case. 25. In support of his submissions, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has cited following rulings:- 1. "Anuj Mahesh Gupta Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax" reported in "2021 SCC Online Bom 14100;" 2. "Manish Kumar v. Directorate General, Goods & Service Tax Intelligence" reported in "2025 SCC Online P&H 5530;" 3. "Rahul Vs. Director General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence, Nagpur Zonal Unit, thr. Sr. Intelligence Officer" reported in "2024 SCC Online Bom 262;" 4. "Radhika Agarwal Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors." reported in "2025 INSC 272." 26. On the other hand, Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, DGGI has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the present petitioner. He submits that there are sufficient incriminating materials in the records to indicate that the present petitioner is a member of a syndicate which is involved in providing fake invoices to coal suppliers to enable them to supply of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in support thereof, severity of punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused and the circumstances which are equivalent to the accused and reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused and the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, larger interest of public/state and other similar considerations. In support of his submission, the learned Standing Counsel, DGGI has cited a ruling of the Apex Court in the case of "Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation" reported in "AIR 2013 SC 1933". 33. The learned Standing Counsel, DGGI has also submitted that the petitioner has approached this Court directly, under Section 483 of BNSS, after rejection of his bail without first approaching before the Sessions Court. He submits that before approaching this Court, petitioner ought to have exhausted his remedy of filing bail application before the Sessions Court and therefore, he submits that this bail application is not maintainable. In support of his submission, he has cited a ruling of Division Bench of this Court in the case of "Kwmta Gwra Brahma Vs. State of Assam" reported in "2015 2 Gau LT 665." 34....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of authorization for arrest of the petitioner issued by the Additional Director General of DGGI, it has been stated that the petitioner may influence witnesses and tamper with the evidence. However, on what basis such a conclusion has been drawn by the Additional Director General, DGGI has not been stated in writing as is the mandate of Section 35 (1) (b) (ii) of the BNSS, 2023. 40. In the case of "Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar" (supra), the Apex Court has while laying down guidelines which are required to be followed before a person may be arrested in case involving offence which entails punishment of imprisonment of less than 7(seven) years or up to 7(seven) years has observed that the directions issued would not only be applicable to the cases under Section 498A of IPC or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 but would also cover such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than 7 (seven) years or which may extend to 7(seven) years, whether with or without fine. Thus, the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar" (supra), are also applicable to this case. 41. The Section 69 of the CGST....