2026 (5) TMI 1361

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....c) & (1) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). 2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the petitioner has been prosecuted by the respondent in a complaint case for the offence under Section 132(1)(b), (c) & (1). It was alleged that inspection u/s 67(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 of the premises of M/s Asim International Tradixim i.e. House Nos. 706/22 & 712/22, Shiv Ji Park, Ram Dharama Kante Wali Gali, Gurugram, Haryana, 122001 was conducted on 31.12.2024 and was found closed/non-operational. Thereafter, search u/s 67(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 was conducted on 20.02.2025 on the said premise. During search proceedings, stocks of goods were found at the above said premises. On being asked about the purchase invoices of ab....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rvices. Hence, Asim Kumar committed offences under the provisions of clause (b), (c) & (1) of sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 and subsequently, he was arrested on 21.02.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram praying for grant of bail, however, finding no merit, the same was declined after hearing both the sides by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram vide order dated 15.10.2025. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing of present petition for grant of bail. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated by the respondent in the present case.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d thus, the petitioner in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, deserves to be granted bail. He relied upon the judgments passed in 'SLP (Criminal) No.4349 of 2025' titled as 'Vineet Jain Vs. Union of India'; 'CRM-M- 8675-2025' titled as 'Manish Kumar Vs. DGGI, Ludhiana'; 'CRM-M- 27147-2025' titled as 'Sarthak Jain Vs. Senior Intelligence Officer; 'CRM-M-69856-2025' titled as 'Naveen Tayal Vs. CGST Faridabad' and 'Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India, 2024 7 SCC 576;. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has committed a serious offence. She submits that case pertains to a large scale GST fraud involving fraudulent availment and passi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on-prosecution by this Court vide order dated 03.02.2026. She submits that the amount for compounding of offences under Section 138 of the CGST Act, can be between 25% to 100% of the tax involved, and the payment of such compounding amount is determined by the Commissioner. She further relied upon the judgments passed in 'P.V. Ramana Reddy Vs. Union of India, 2019(25) G.S.T.L. 185 (Telangana)', 'Badha Ram Vs. Intelligence Officer, Kerala GST Department Alappuzha, (2023) 13 Centax 239 (ker.)' and 'Nimmagadda Prasad Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2013 (3) SCC' etc. She submits that in all there are total 04 accused in the present FIR, out of which, 03 accused are already on bail, however, they are absconding now and necessary steps will....