TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 665
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... goods-less invoices without actual supply of goods having taxable value of Rs. 1,30,33,91,023/- and hence passed on fraudulent/fake ITC of Rs. 23,66,02,499/- to various taxpayers within and outside the jurisdiction of CGST, Faridabad Commissionerate. In the complaint, the details of 09 taxpayers firms including the dates they were created and their relation with the present petitioner have been mentioned. It is further the case of complainant-department that all these 09 taxpayer firms in the syndicate owned and operated by present petitioner have 'Nil' or 'Negligible' inward supplies, as per their GSTRA-2A, as is apparent from the inward supply chain of M/s Sat India Insulation, one of the tax payer firm in the aforesaid syndicate of 09 taxpayer firms. On perusal of e-way bills, it was observed that there was no co-ordination between the weight of goods and the capacity of vehicles used while transportation of goods since the vehicles used were either three wheelers, as per report obtained from transport authority. Neither the quantity of goods was mentioned in the e-way bills. Further, Accountant working for the petitioner stated that he on the instructions of petitioner was gen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....filed the GST Returns, as per law. Continuing further, learned counsel submits that though investigation in the present case is complete but the completion of trial would take long time. The fact that the petitioner has clean antecedents, is permanent resident of Faridabad, the offences allegedly committed by him (being Magisterial triable) are punishable with imprisonment which may extend to maximum period of 05 years and the likelihood of completion of trial in the near future is quite remote, lenient view deserves to be taken in his favour by allowing the present petition. In support of his submissions, learned counsel places reliance on following judgments:- (i) Ganga Ram Vs. State of Punjab, (2021 (44) GSTL 5) of this Court. (ii) Ratnambar Kaushik Vs. Union of India, (2022) 1 Centax 278 (SC) of Hon'ble Supreme Court. (iii) Vishal Chauhan Vs. Haryana State GST (Intelligence Unit), Rohtak, ((2024) 21 Centax 434) of Punjab and Haryana High Court. (iv) Ashutosh Garg Vs. Union of India, ((2024) 20 Centax 595 (SC)). (v) Sandeep Singhal Vs. DGGSTI, ((2024) 16 Centax 443) of Rajasthan High Court. (vi) Manish Kumar Vs. Directorat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ully go through Section 132 CGST Act, which reads as under:- "132. Punishment for certain offences.- (1) Whoever commits any of the following offences, namely:- (a) supplies any goods or services or both without issue of any invoice, in violation of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, with the intention to evade tax; (b) issues any invoice or bill without supply of goods or services or both in violation of the provisions of this Act, or the rules made thereunder leading to wrongful availment or utilisation of input tax credit or refund of tax; (c) avails input tax credit using such invoice or bill referred to in clause (b); shall be punishable-- (i) in cases where the amount of tax evaded or the amount of input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised or the amount of refund wrongly taken exceeds five hundred lakh rupees, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five year and with fine. (ii) in cases where the amount of tax evaded or the amount of input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised or the amount of refund wrongly taken exceeds two hundred lakh rupees but does not exceed five....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ho had been alleged of committing forgery, cheating and use of forged documents, on the ground that the offences are serious, involved deep rooted planning and huge loss had been caused to the Exchequer, as also that if allowed the relief of bail the possibility of accused tampering with the evidence could not be ruled out. In that context, Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "43. When the undertrial prisoners are detained in jail custody to an indefinite period, Article 21 of the Constitution is violated. Every person, detained or arrested, is entitled to speedy trial, the question is: whether the same is possible in the present case. There are seventeen accused persons. Statement of the witnesses runs to several hundred pages and the documents on which reliance is placed by the prosecution, is voluminous. The trial may take considerable time and it looks to us that the appellants, who are in jail, have to remain in jail longer than the period of detention, had they been convicted. It is not in the interest of justice that accused should be in jail for an indefinite period. No doubt, the offence alleged against the appellants is a serious one in terms of allege....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. Therefore, in determining whether to grant bail, both the seriousness of the charge and the severity of the punishment should be taken into consideration. 40. The grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the discretion of the Court . The grant or denial is regulated, to a large extent, by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. But at the same time, right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the community against the accused. The primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him, pending the trial, and at the same time, to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the Court, whether before or after conviction, to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the Court and be in attendance thereon whenever his presence is required. 41. This Court in Gurcharan Singh and Ors. v. State, AIR 1978 Supreme Court 179 observed that two paramount considerations, while considering petition for grant of bail in non-bailable offence, apart from the seriousness of the offence, are the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt nature, the evidence to be tendered by the respondent would essentially be documentary and electronic. The ocular evidence will be through official witnesses, due to which there can be no apprehension of tampering, intimidating or influencing. Therefore, keeping all these aspects in perspective, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, we find it proper to grant the prayer made by the petitioner. 7. Hence, it is directed that the petitioner be released on bail subject to the conditions to be imposed by the trial Court, which among others, shall also include the condition to direct the petitioner to deposit his passport. Further, such other conditions shall also be imposed by the trial Court to secure the presence of the petitioner to diligently participate in the trial. It is further directed that the petitioner be produced before the trial Court forthwith, to ensure compliance of this order." (emphasis added) 13. It thus emerges that even in cases involving economic offences, the Court seized of the matter has to go through the gravity of the offence, the object of the Act, the attending circumstances, etc. Thus, economic offences cannot be categ....