Section 132 of the RGST Act, 2017 — Bail application — The petitioner are husband and wife. There are several entities in the nature of Proprietorship Concerns, Partnership Concerns or Private Limited Companies, in which the petitioners are Proprietor, Partner and Directors and the entities are engaged in the supply of Iron and Steel by way of sales/purchases. During the course of inspection conducted, it was found that huge Input Tax Credit was passed on/distributed amongst the various entities fraudulently. On further verification of the online E-way bills generated by the entities, it was found that the so-called movement of goods itself was false. The petitioners facing prosecution before the respondents for the alleged offences punishable under Section 132 of the Act, sought anticipatory bail. The petitioner submitted that they have been carrying on with the business for a very long time and they are not fly by night operators.

Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court held that in the light of the nature and gravity of the accusations put forth by the prosecution and also the fact that the investigation is at a very early stage, is not inclined to entertain these anticipatory bail petitions. The Court directed the petitioners, to make complete disclosure by submitting all the relevant documents before the respondent and it is for the respondent to consider the same and satisfy themselves and proceed further in accordance with law. — Mahendra Kumar Singhi Vs. Commissioner of State Tax [2019] 10 TAXLOK.COM 087 (Madras)