2026 (4) TMI 940
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rict Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 132 (1) (c) of the Central Goods and Service Tax, 2017. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the non-applicant, the accused/ applicant has taken Input Tax Credit to the tune of Rs. 11,44,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Crores Forty Four Lakhs Only) without supply of goods, reason being the 4/four Firms i.e. M/s. Aksha Trading, M/s. M.K. Enterprises, M/s. Dishankar Trading and M/s. Giridhar Gopal Impex Pvt. Ltd. as per the departmental inquiry do not carry on any business and have not supplied any goods in Raipur, and the prosecution/non-applicant, that as per the statement of the accused/applicant entire work of the Proprietorship M/s. Vijay Laxmi Trade Company is overseen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed 30/10/2025. That Writ Petition (Tax) bearing No. 6/2026 was preferred by the Proprietor of the Firm in question (M/S Vijay Laxmi Trade Company) before this Hon'ble High Court which is sub-judice before this Hon'ble Court. The aforesaid petition poses challenge to the adverse steps taken by the non-applicants against the proprietorship firm specifically in nature of bank account attachment and creation of negative balance in the electronic credit ledger/negatively blocking electronic credit ledger. That, a copy of the aforesaid writ petition without annexures is being annexed to the present application as the facts stated therein precisely reflect the chronology of event(s) preceding the applicant's arrest and specifically ref....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....02.2026, that certified copy of the order(s) dated 30.01.2026 and granting judicial custody of the applicant/accused along with order dated 04.02.2026 rejecting bail of the applicant/accused passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate are collectively annexed to the present petition. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the prosecution has not determined the alleged tax liability, which can only be finalized upon proper assessment proceedings (subject to appeal), in the absence of such determination, arrest and continued detention are arbitrary and violative of constitutional safeguards. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ory requirement of notice and hearing under Section 75(4) has not been followed, rendering the entire proceedings procedurally defective and the applicant has fully cooperated with the investigation pursuant to summons under Section 70. The prosecution has already interrogated the applicant and does not require further custodial interrogation, as evident from the immediate request for judicial custody. He also submits that rejoinder has already been filed in response to the reply filed by the respondent/DGGI. He would submit that the applicant is in custody since 29/01/2026, the investigation is complete, complaint has already been filed, and no further custodial interrogation is required. Hence, the applicant deserves to be released on bai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion is still at a crucial stage, requiring examination of multiple stakeholders including fake suppliers, transporters and intermediaries. It is pertinent to note that the applicant is also implicated in a separate case involving bank fraud of approximately Rs.61 crores, which further reflects his propensity to engage in serious economic offences. In view of the seriousness of allegations, strong prima facie evidence, non-cooperative conduct of the applicant, and the likelihood of interference with investigation, the present case does not warrant grant of bail. Hence, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the rival submissions and mater....
TaxTMI
TaxTMI