TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 943
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce punishable under Sections 132 of CGST Act, 2017. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the respondent/DGGI has alleged that M/s Hindustan Corporation is a proprietorship firm, in the name of Sanyasi Jagat who is said to be the Proprietor of the firm. The said firm fraudulently availed the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) without actually receiving any goods from various bogus/non-existent supplier firms, and subsequently passed on the same ITC to several downstream entities without supplying any actual goods. Thus, the firm has misused the ITC by issuing fraudulent invoices for the sum of Rs. 7,59,25,127/-. Further it is alleged that secret information was received by the DGGI from an informer, after which investigation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the firm which shows that the applicant is the proprietor of M/s Hindustan Corporation. It is submitted that the applicant is not the proprietor of M/s Hindustan Corporation, the said proprietor is Jagat Sanyasi, as per the allegation the applicant has forged ITC with the M/s Hindustan Corporation if that was the case, then the main accused Jagat Sanyasi musth have been arrested but without arresting the main accused person, the applicant has been arrested. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 14.03.2026. In such circumstances, continued incarceration of the applicant would serve no useful purpose and would amount to violation of his right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of facts, multiple summons were issued to the applicant requiring him to appear and tender oral evidence. However, he deliberately avoided appearance before the department and failed to comply with the summons issued to him, thereby obstructing the investigation. 5. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the non-applicant that since the applicant was absconding and had not appeared before this office despite issuance of various summons, intelligence was gathered through reliable sources regarding his current whereabouts. It was considered that the applicant was arriving at Swami Vivekanand Airport, Raipur from Delhi. Accordingly, officers of DGGI, Raipur Zonal Unit reached Swami Vivekanand Airport, Raipur. Thereafter, the office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mental in creation and operation of M/s Hindustan Corporation and that fraudulent availment and passing of Input Tax Credit (ITC) to the tune of Rs. 7,59,25,127/- was undertaken through the said entity, however, it is also noticeable that the proprietorship of M/s Hindustan Corporation admittedly stands in the name of Jagat Sanyasi and no document of unimpeachable character has been pointed out at this stage to conclusively establish that the applicant is the proprietor of the said firm. The prosecution seeks to connect the applicant with the alleged offence primarily on the basis of statements recorded during investigation, financial transactions between the accounts of M/s Hindustan Corporation and M/s Khyati Enterprises and circumstances....