Keeping in view that the petitioner has complied with the conditions imposed in the order vide which interim bail was granted to the petitioner, the present prayer for grant of regular bail is allowed
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017—Bail -- The petitioner prayed for bail. It is alleged that the petitioner availed a hefty amount of ITC on the basis of invoices issued by their suppliers, without any actual movement of goods. The supplier firms were not even in existence at their registered premises. It is alleged that the petitioner availed ITC amounting to Rs. 15.44 crores. The petitioner submitted that search of the factory premises was started on 27.03.2018 and the petitioner had co-operated and subsequently on 07.12.2020, he was arrested and that the complaint had already been filed, thus, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required. The respondent counsel submitted that the petitioner had been creating fake invoices and wrongfully availing ITC. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim bail to the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance of the order, the petitioner has furnished a bank guarantee to the concerned Authority for payment of tax liability and has also complied with the other conditions. The court observed that the petitioner has complied with the conditions as imposed in the detailed order dated 16.03.2021 vide which interim bail was granted to the petitioner and the petitioner had been in custody from 07.12.2020 till 16.03.2021 and that challan has already been filed and the case is primarily based on documentary evidence, thus, no purpose would be served in sending the petitioner back into custody.
Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and the order dated 16.03.2021 is made absolute.
Keeping in view that the petitioner has complied with the conditions imposed in the order vide which interim bail was granted to the petitioner, the present prayer for grant of regular bail is allowed
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017—Bail -- The petitioner prayed for bail. It is alleged that the petitioner availed a hefty amount of ITC on the basis of invoices issued by their suppliers, without any actual movement of goods. The supplier firms were not even in existence at their registered premises. It is alleged that the petitioner availed ITC amounting to Rs. 15.44 crores. The petitioner submitted that search of the factory premises was started on 27.03.2018 and the petitioner had co-operated and subsequently on 07.12.2020, he was arrested and that the complaint had already been filed, thus, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required. The respondent counsel submitted that the petitioner had been creating fake invoices and wrongfully availing ITC. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim bail to the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance of the order, the petitioner has furnished a bank guarantee to the concerned Authority for payment of tax liability and has also complied with the other conditions. The court observed that the petitioner has complied with the conditions as imposed in the detailed order dated 16.03.2021 vide which interim bail was granted to the petitioner and the petitioner had been in custody from 07.12.2020 till 16.03.2021 and that challan has already been filed and the case is primarily based on documentary evidence, thus, no purpose would be served in sending the petitioner back into custody.
Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and the order dated 16.03.2021 is made absolute.