TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1732
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Zonal Unit, Hyderabad. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, Managing Director of M/s. Bhagyanagar India Limited, a reputed listed company, purchased copper scrap from M/s. AMZ Traders after due KYC verification and compliance checks. Between November 2022 and March 2023, the company undertook 153 transactions worth about Rs.97.25 crores, supported by invoices, e-way bills, transport records, and banking transactions. Subsequently, proceedings were initiated under Section 70 of the CGST Act alleging wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner furnished all documents and cooperated with the investigation, but later discovered that the supplier's GST registration was retrosp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quiry, and the possibility of non-genuine transactions cannot be ruled out at this stage. Therefore, it is argued that custodial interrogation may be required and the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that respondent No.2 initially issued summons dated 06.11.2025 requiring the presence of the petitioner on 13.11.2025. On the request of the petitioner, the same was rescheduled to 24.11.2025, on which date a formal statement was recorded. Thereafter, on 25.11.2025, the petitioner submitted all documents pertaining to the supplies r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding on the quantum involved. However, in the present case, the petitioner has expressed readiness to deposit the alleged evaded amount and there is no material placed before this Court indicating any prior criminal antecedents or history of tax evasion. As seen from the record, the allegations are predominantly based on documentary evidence, which is already in possession of the respondent authorities. The petitioner is apprehending arrest and contended that offences under the CGST Act, though economic in nature, do not warrant custodial interrogation, as the punishment prescribed is not severe and the evidence is primarily documentary. Further, reliance is placed on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cient degree of certainty. In such cases, the Commissioner may authorise arrest when he is able to ascertain and record reasons to believe. As indicated above, the reasons to believe must be explicit and refer to the material and evidence underlying such opinion. There has to be a degree of certainty to establish that the offence is committed and that such offence is non-bailable. The principle of benefit of doubt would equally be applicable and should not be ignored either by the Commissioner or by the Magistrate when the accused is produced before the Magistrate. 71. However, we may clarify that a person summoned under Section 70 of the CGST Act is not per se an accused protected under Article 20(3) of the Constitution, as has be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eriousness. In appropriate cases, application for anticipatory bail can be allowed, which may also be conditional. It is not essential that the application for anticipatory bail should be moved only after an FIR is filed, as long as facts are clear and there is a reasonable basis for apprehending arrest. This principle was confirmed recently by a Constitution Bench of five Judges of this Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) [Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1:(2020) 2 SCC (Cri) 721] . Some decisions [State of Gujarat v. Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer, (2023) 20 SCC 315:(2023) 115 GSTR 297; Bharat Bhushan v. GST Intelligence, (2024) 129 GSTR 297 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2586] of this Court in the context of the G....