Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of offence, role of accused and evidence surfaced against the accused till date, this is not a fit case to grant bail to the accused/applicant at this stage. Hence, the same is dismissed.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail -- The applicant prayed for bail on the ground that he has been falsely implicated in this case and does not have any concern with the alleged firms. There has not been any fraudulent availment of ITC by the accused. The address which has been mentioned by the Department in its reply is nowhere concerned to the accused and there has been no document to show that the same belongs to the accused. Period of custody for more than 50 days is also averred as one of the grounds. The respondent opposed the Bail on the ground of gravity of offence and huge amount of the availment of fraudulent ITC where accused is directly connected. The court observed that applicant has been arrested for his involvement in the issuance of ineligible/bogus ITC through fake/bogus firm to the tune of Rs. 150,31,56,389/- without actual supplying of any goods. Similarly, the firm has also availed the ITC to the tune of Rs. 10,93,21,314 crores.
Held that:-The Hon’ble Court seeing the gravity of the case, dismissed the petition and rejected the bail application.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of offence, role of accused and evidence surfaced against the accused till date, this is not a fit case to grant bail to the accused/applicant at this stage. Hence, the same is dismissed.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail -- The applicant prayed for bail on the ground that he has been falsely implicated in this case and does not have any concern with the alleged firms. There has not been any fraudulent availment of ITC by the accused. The address which has been mentioned by the Department in its reply is nowhere concerned to the accused and there has been no document to show that the same belongs to the accused. Period of custody for more than 50 days is also averred as one of the grounds. The respondent opposed the Bail on the ground of gravity of offence and huge amount of the availment of fraudulent ITC where accused is directly connected. The court observed that applicant has been arrested for his involvement in the issuance of ineligible/bogus ITC through fake/bogus firm to the tune of Rs. 150,31,56,389/- without actual supplying of any goods. Similarly, the firm has also availed the ITC to the tune of Rs. 10,93,21,314 crores.
Held that:-The Hon’ble Court seeing the gravity of the case, dismissed the petition and rejected the bail application.