If the bail as claimed by the applicant is granted in his favour in that case certainly it would adversely affect the further investigation. Resultantly, the application fails.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Anticipatory Bail -- The applicant sought anticipatory bail for the offence under Section 132 of the Act. It is alleged that the applicant had committed the offences and has caused substantial loss to the government through his company by wrongfully availing and passing on of ITC amounting to more than Rs. 16 Crores in a fraudulent manner by issuing and receiving bogus invoices. Therefore the applicant apprehends that he is likely to be arrested by the respondent. According to him there is no GST evasion on his part. No money trail has been brought on record showing that the applicant is the beneficiary of alleged fake ITC credit. The applicant had attended the office of the respondent, and custodial interrogation of the applicant is not warranted. The court observed that based on the allegations made against the applicant, no case is made out for exercising discretion for grant of pre-arrest bail.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
If the bail as claimed by the applicant is granted in his favour in that case certainly it would adversely affect the further investigation. Resultantly, the application fails.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Anticipatory Bail -- The applicant sought anticipatory bail for the offence under Section 132 of the Act. It is alleged that the applicant had committed the offences and has caused substantial loss to the government through his company by wrongfully availing and passing on of ITC amounting to more than Rs. 16 Crores in a fraudulent manner by issuing and receiving bogus invoices. Therefore the applicant apprehends that he is likely to be arrested by the respondent. According to him there is no GST evasion on his part. No money trail has been brought on record showing that the applicant is the beneficiary of alleged fake ITC credit. The applicant had attended the office of the respondent, and custodial interrogation of the applicant is not warranted. The court observed that based on the allegations made against the applicant, no case is made out for exercising discretion for grant of pre-arrest bail.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court rejected the anticipatory bail application.