Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

This Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment of the Single Judge rejecting the application filed by the appellants/petitioners under Section 167 of CrPC for grant of default bail. Accordingly, the writ appeal being without any substance is hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself.

Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Bail –– The appellant challenged the order dated 1.10.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the petition filed against the order dated 26.6.2021 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, by which the revisional Court affirmed the order dated 12.5.2021 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur rejecting the application filed by the appellants/petitioners under Section 167 of CrPC for grant of default bail. It is alleged that the appellants created several fictitious and physically non-existent trading company firms and issued fake bills to transmit fake ITC to several other traders. The appellants filed an application for granting them default bail, as no charge sheet was filed within 60 days. The said application was rejected by the CJM vide order dated 12.5.2021, which was subsequently affirmed by the revisional Court vide order dated 26.6.2021 and the writ petition filed against the said order was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants were arrested on 25.1.2021 but no charge sheet within 60 days from their judicial custody was filed and only a complaint was filed on 25.3.2021. The court observed that the material collected during investigation as filed with the complaint are sufficient for establishing a prima facie case against them under Section 132(1)(b) & (c) of the Act and therefore, on filing of such complaint, the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence against them. The court keeping relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Mahajan observed that though the complaint filed by respondent No.2 cannot be said to have been filed under Section 173 of CrPC but for the purpose of default bail, it can be said that respondent No.2, who is an authorized officer under the Act to carry out investigation/enqiury, filed the complaint within the prescribed time limit which satisfies the requirement under Section 167 of CrPC.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the writ appeal being without any substance, at the admission stage itself.

Professional services available Audit Management
Tax Lok English Viedo
Tax Lok Hindi Viedo
Check Your Tax Knowledge
Youtube
HR Consulting services

FOR FREE CONDUCTED TOUR OF OUR ON-LINE LIBRARIES WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVE-- CLICK HERE

FOR ANY SUPPORT ON GST/INCOME TAX

Do You Want To Take FREE DEMO Of Our GST/Income Tax Library.